Driving down Public road in Lafayette, you may notice black tall cameras, adorned with a solar panel, taking continuous snapshots of vehicles’ rear license plates. These Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Flock AI-cameras from Flock Safety have  centered in community discourse due to growing concerns surrounding surveillance and risk of misuse by police and federal agents.

30 cameras were installed in 2022 by the Lafayette Police Department (PD) around the city, with no more installed since. Community interest for discussion around the cameras was not high at first, but Detective Commander Scott Emerson noticed more concern after an influx of social media posts and alleged “misinformation” around Flock, said Emerson.

Perhaps due to this growing interest, on June 17th, more than a dozen Lafayette community members settled into a dimly lit room in the Lafayette PD building as three officers and two Flock camera spokespeople put on “Cop Talks #2: Facts About Flock Safety Cameras.”

The Cop Talk, part of a series of presentations held by the Lafayette PD meant for conversations within the community, began with a presentation given by Detective Sergeant Jason Thompson. The PD began searching for a “law enforcement force multiplier” after a spike in car-related crimes in 2020.

According to the Colorado Department of Public Safety May 2026 Newsletter, in Lafayette, auto thefts skyrocketed from 61 in 2020 to 120 in 2022, an increase of 64%. In Colorado overall, auto theft rates dropped from 18,450 in 2022 to 7,480 in 2025. Detective Thompson said this large drop can be attributed to the Flock cameras. Chart is courtesy of coloradocrimestats.state.co.us/tops

These cameras are different from the Blissway speeding cameras on Diagonal Highway. Unlike the speeding cameras in Boulder, Flock cameras are fixed, motion-activated ALPRs meant to investigate crimes and wanted persons. The PD originally hoped to use the cameras for traffic enforcement as well. Flock’s speeding cameras would require photos with identifying features in them. The public was concerned with the possibility of discriminatory policing based on these photos, as well as worries that these cameras would be abused by the department to profit from speeding tickets. Lafayette PD scrapped the idea after the backlash.

The current Lafayette AI Flock Safety system has two primary components: The hotlist and audits. According to the PD, Flock cameras can provide police officers with near real time alerts as well a hotlist, or a database of license plates and vehicle descriptors associated with the wanted car and photos of the rear of the vehicle. 

Officers also have to click a legal agreement before signing into the Flock Safety system, pressing a small button saying “Accept and Continue” below a compliance message. In accordance with Colorado law, “We are not using this for unauthorized purposes,” said Thompson, “we’re not using it for immigration enforcement or reproductive care.” He said the legal agreement before sign-in is “an important accountability piece.”

An example of a hotlist on the Flock Safety website, narrowed down to a specific timeframe. Flock provides a photo of the vehicle’s rear, the color/make/style/other notable descriptors of the vehicle, the date and time the image was captured, and the direction of travel. The Lafayette PD says this data is “common practice” to have. Photo courtesy of Finn Feldman

While these statements regarding how Lafayette intends to use Flock are important, their practical application faces a hard legal reality. As Yellow Scene Magazine has previously reported, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) emphasizes that local data protection claims are essentially hollow; regardless of what a city government promises, the federal government can demand access to their citizen data at any time, for any purpose, because state and federal laws prevent cities from withholding that information.

Lafayette PD says they looked at 9 different major ALPR systems and settled on Flock primarily for its proclaimed privacy concern considerations. Flock claims that it deletes photos taken after 30-days and that the company does not sell customer data. Flock also boasts that it has not had cloud data breaches. Contrary to these claims, local news reports demonstrate flock camera feeds have been exposed in an internet data breach, and their data on license plates have been accessed through search engines.  Denver removed all its Flock cameras after it was found federal agencies have bypassed ICE/DHS restrictions by having PDs run searches for them. A blog post by Flock says “ICE does not have direct access to Flock cameras, systems, or data, unless the agencies that control their data expressly and deliberately allow it.” 

Flock Safety Public Affairs Officers Bia Campbell (left) next to Jalen Johnson (right) answered a few questions at the Cop Talk, ending off by promoting themselves as an honest company whose clients are both the PD and the community. Courtesy of Finn Feldman

Unlike many of its neighbors, the city of Lafayette currently has a five year contract with Flock that started in 2022 after four community meetings and a city council workshop. The Lafayette PD argues that departments such as Fort Collins, Denver, and Louisville will fall behind with their abandonment of Flock cameras after widespread criticism of surveillance and AI caused these cities to end contracts. With the use of AI in Flock’s vehicle search system, Lafayette PD says officers must check to see if the AI correctly got the license plate—for example, to make sure Flock’s AI doesn’t read a 0 (zero) as an O on the plate. Another alleged “safeguard” is Flock’s AI auditing system, used to track if any suspicious activity is occurring with officers’ searches. Flagged audit reports are then sent to a team of four Lafayette PD administrators to review, and then an audit completion report to Emerson.

Chris Anderson, a community member who works in IT, has concerns over the AI camera use and auditing practices, saying “AI is foulable right now.” Anderson pressed the PD to have an external group check their reports, worried about how “their own system is auditing it.”

The PD in their presentation said these twice monthly searches are being done internally and externally, but later during community discussion said only the four administrators are checking the AI flagged/human created audits. Emerson said after his main take away is to look into how other PDs may be using an external auditing system for “best practice.”

Lafayette City Councilor Annemarie Jensen confirmed an external auditing system was brought up at past town meetings, but says “Lafayette is a small town with a small budget” and thinks it may not be worth the cost.

Anderson also questioned the PD around controversies surrounding Flock, including 404 Media’s reporting of ICE agents using the cameras for immigration enforcement and alleged improper storage of data, asking “How are you holding Flock accountable?” 

Emerson responded, “I have done my due diligence in looking into the matter,” and said all the claims were not verified. Spokesman Johnson responded as well, stating “these [allegations] are not verifiable.” 

Despite these refutations, local advocates and residents continue to challenge the police department’s stance. Among them is Will Freeman, founder of the anti-ALPR website DeFlock, who has filed a class-action lawsuit against the neighboring city of Boulder over its use of the technology. Freeman and another Boulder resident, Gwen Steel, are currently awaiting a court order for class certification, signaling that community pushback against automated surveillance remains a growing legal hurdle for local governments.

Yellow Scene’s 2026 Summer Support Drive is underway with a goal of 1,000 Sustaining Supporters by summer’s end.

For 26 years, we have remained fiercely independent, free from sponsored content and outside editorial influence.

Reader-driven support keeps local journalism unbossed, unbought, and our journalists fed. Become a sustaining supporter for $8/month and get Yellow Scene delivered to your home.

Join the Summer Support Drive and keep local journalism strong.

The post Lafayette Police hosts talk amid concerns around Flock cameras appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Less than a week after the Erie Town Council’s deadlocked vote rejected a proposed mineral rights agreement tied to the Draco Pad, Councilmember Brian O’Connor has called for a reconsideration of the decision. The council is scheduled to revisit the topic on June 23, reopening one of the most divisive debates facing the town.

The request for a revote followed a social media post by Matthew Owens, CEO of Alameda Mineral Advisors, the firm hired by the town to negotiate the deal. In the original version of his LinkedIn post, Owens explicitly urged O’Connor to call for a reconsideration of his vote, a directive that was later edited out.

The original June 21 social media post by Matthew Owens, which explicitly urged Councilmember Brian O’Connor to reconsider his vote.

The edited version of the same post published later on June 21, with the direct appeal to O’Connor removed

Beyond the immediate political maneuvering, Owens’ public defense disclosed specific details from confidential Executive Sessions regarding bids, valuations, and negotiations. Residents were repeatedly denied this exact information prior to the vote under the guise of executive session confidentiality. While Owens released these details publicly to defend the merits of the deal, he did so without providing the underlying documentation. Furthermore, several of his assertions directly contradict the public record.

In his post, Owens outlined several key figures regarding the negotiations:

• Marketing Reach: Alameda solicited bids from 25 companies, 19 of which declined to submit offers.

• Competing Bids: The highest competing offer was approximately $5.5 million.

• Internal Valuations: SM Energy (formerly Civitas) internally valued the mineral rights between $54.7 million and $71.1 million. Unsolicited offers implied a baseline valuation of roughly $43 million.

• Contract Changes: Alterations made to the final agreement after Alameda’s active involvement ended allegedly reduced the deal’s total value by roughly $8 million.

Owens’ claim that Alameda actively solicited competitive bids directly contradicts his own previous statements. In a prior council study session, before being cut off by the Town Attorney, Owens told council members and a Yellow Scene reporter that he was “instructed not to” conduct a competitive bidding process by “the people who hired [him].”

Shown Matthew Owens at Counsel Hearing

When pressed in the comments of his post regarding competitive bidding, his editing choices, and SM Energy’s track record, Owens sidestepped the questions. Instead, he engaged critics with generalized political arguments and personal character attacks.

A public records analysis reveals that these claims vary significantly in their verifiability, falling into three distinct categories:

• Claims Supported by Public Records:

  • The Draco Pad project has already received state approval and is highly likely to proceed regardless of Erie’s decision on its mineral rights. The Town of Erie lacks the legal authority to revoke those state approvals.

• Claims Relying Heavily on Projections:

  • Alameda’s estimate asserts the agreement could generate up to $465 million in total value to Erie, projecting that transferred land could eventually generate hundreds of millions in future tax revenue. Conversely, the firm estimated that retaining the mineral rights would yield only $2.7 million to $4 million in royalty revenue over roughly 30 years.

• Claims Lacking Independent Verification:

  • Because no official documentation accompanied Owens’ post and the underlying materials remain shielded by executive session privacy, the public cannot verify the number of companies contacted, the actual value of competing offers, SM Energy’s internal valuation figures, or the alleged $8 million reduction caused by contract changes

The lack of transparency throughout this entire negotiation process has now drawn state scrutiny. The Colorado Attorney General’s office is currently reviewing a formal complaint filed by resident Steve Drew. The complaint alleges a pattern of procedural irregularities, including the lack of a Request for Proposal (RFP) process when hiring Alameda Mineral Advisors, a lack of competitive bidding during negotiations, the potential misuse of Executive Session confidentiality, and conflict of interest concerns.

This sequence of events has intensified the local debate over municipal transparency. The core issue is not whether local governments have the legal right to use executive sessions; Colorado law explicitly permits closed sessions to protect a municipality’s bargaining position during active negotiations. Rather, the controversy centers on whether Erie officials used confidentiality appropriately to safeguard a sensitive transaction, or whether they unnecessarily kept residents in the dark regarding the true mechanics and consequences of the deal.

Information that residents consistently requested during public meetings—including bidder participation, competing offers, and valuation ranges—was withheld from the citizenry only to be made public by a third-party contractor after the vote had occurred.

“The making of this deal is cloaked in secrecy of executive session,” resident Emily Brecht told the council on June 16. “We, the people of Erie, have valid questions. If people here are misinformed about the deal, it appears to be by design.”

The state’s review will proceed independently, but local action moves forward immediately. The Erie Town Council will reconvene to take a definitive vote on the mineral rights agreement on Tuesday, June 23, at 6:30 p.m

Yellow Scene’s 2026 Summer Support Drive is underway with a goal of 1,000 Sustaining Supporters by summer’s end.

For 26 years, we have remained fiercely independent, free from sponsored content and outside editorial influence.

Reader-driven support keeps local journalism unbossed, unbought, and our journalists fed. Become a sustaining supporter for $8/month and get Yellow Scene delivered to your home.

Join the Summer Support Drive and keep local journalism strong.

The post O’Connor Requests Vote After Contractor Lobbies on Social Media appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Longmont has long prided itself on being ahead of the curve. It was the first city in Colorado to offer municipal broadband, provides the majority of public utilities, and has been a community that has never shied away from embracing what comes next. But in December, residents packed city council chambers and forced a reckoning over surveillance cameras, pushing out one ALPR vendor in Flock and setting off three months of hard conversations about privacy, data and power. Now a new vendor is in, 15 cameras are headed back up, and Longmont finds itself with a chance to prove that being ahead of the curve means more than just adopting technology first: it also means governing it well. 

To understand what that actually looks like, I spoke with two anti-surveillance activists, two city council members and the police department’s leadership.

Andrew Palmer has been a fixture at the public comment stand in recent months. Raised by two educators, he was drawn to science and technology from a young age, eventually becoming a systems engineer at Advanced Space. He has spent his career studying complex systems, and pertinently, how they fail. 

Andrew Palmer

“Sometimes failures are an unknown consequence of actions that you couldn’t possibly have foreseen,” he said, citing his work on Boeing 737s.

That lens brought him to city council meetings. “The most complex and most important systems in our lives are the ones made up of both technology and people,” he told me. 

“Failures in those systems are critical and catastrophic and can affect people’s lives, even be life and death.” 

Palmer stressed the importance of “systems thinking” and believes the city should be applying it to the surveillance conversation. He is not alone. His efforts to raise the alarm about risks to citizen privacy led him to the Visible Government League, an activist group whose mission is to “encourage caution, transparency, and public oversight regarding government use of surveillance and other emerging technologies.”

For Palmer, the central ask is not necessarily the removal of cameras, it’s sequencing.

“By the time these technologies are implemented and part of city strategy, it’s often too late to do much about it,” he said. 

In his view, an emerging technologies advisory board is a prerequisite for smart policy. A board seated before the next technology arrives means the city can evaluate it on the front end, with civil rights lawyers and technical experts at the table, rather than scrambling to catch up after the fact. 

“If we can’t satisfy certain requirements for this technology,” he said, “we shouldn’t have it.”

He wants residents who aren’t following this closely to understand what’s at stake:

 “These are not simply CCTV cameras. These are networked and capturing personal information of everyone entering and leaving the city.” 

And he has a message for anyone who thinks one voice doesn’t matter. “I have found that I’ve had a much greater impact than I thought I would,” he said. “One visit with a city council member, one email, one time attending one of these meetings can be hugely impactful.”

Palmer sees Longmont’s response to surveillance pushback as an opportunity for broader influence. “Denver watches us. All the cities around us watch us. And then the nation watches Denver and the Front Range,” he said. “I want Longmont to continue being the leader in what good use of technology looks like for other cities.”

Council member Matthew Popkin also considers himself a systems thinker. With a day job at Rocky Mountain Institute, this is not his first rodeo when it comes to approaching new technology on a municipal scale. He tracks emerging technologies across the energy, sustainability and municipal functions spaces, and one thing he keeps seeing is how much data management and data protection matter regardless of the sector.

Matthew Popkin

“We manage a lot of data,” he told me. 

“How we manage that matters, and how we protect that data is critical.” 

Popkin pointed out that ALPR technology reduces the number of direct interactions between officers and the public, because if a camera can determine whether a vehicle is even relevant to a case, an officer doesn’t need to make that stop.

“You can have a black Subaru with this license plate and suddenly you’re no longer concerned with all the rest of the black Subarus,” he said. “It allows our officers to focus just on that, and go into those situations more prepared.”

Kellen Lask, a local software engineer and member of Visible Government League, sees that differently. For Lask, a safer community isn’t built by officers surveilling it from a distance but rather from officers embedded in it, connecting with the people they serve. Lask is not reflexively anti-technology. In fact, he was the kid programming games on his graphing calculator in school and describes himself as fascinated with technology. 

Kellen Lask

Even so, he has doubts that the efficiency that comes with this surveillance technology will equate to safety.

As a fourth-generation Longmonter, former legislative staffer and teacher, Councilmember Jake Marsing comes at this from a different angle. He campaigned on fighting for working families, and when I asked him how that shapes his view on surveillance, you could tell the question carried real weight for him. He was also the one to make the motion to terminate the city’s contract with Flock during the December council meeting. Popkin seconded it.

Marsing considers the surveillance topic akin to issues like housing affordability in the sense that it begs the question: “What kind of governance are we doing, and what kind of community are we leaving our kids?” He expressed the desire to do everything he can to protect citizens’ privacy in an era where that is increasingly difficult. At a minimum, he believes, the city should ensure resident’s data is protected and not accessible to other jurisdictions except in active investigations. 

Lask echoed this sentiment, but frames the stakes more broadly. “What kind of community are we building?” he asked. 

“An automated eye in the sky tracking every single person? That feels like a very paranoid and distrustful community. That doesn’t feel like a happy, ‘I go help my neighbor’ kind of community.” 

If people assume the cameras are watching, he argues, they may stop watching out for each other. “We’re offloading the responsibility to our community to keep an eye out for each other” Lask maintains “Like ‘Oh the cameras will do that.’” 

A more disconnected community, Lask fears, could be one of the quieter, unintended consequences of building a future around this technology. He also worries about the impact on expression itself, and that perhaps the persistent awareness of being tracked suppresses behavior in ways that go beyond what any policy intends, leaving people less comfortable simply being out in the world. 

During his conversation with Yellow Scene Magazine, Council member Marsing spoke frankly about the fine balance a councilmember must strike. 

Jake Marsing

“We sit in this cross section of legislative branch policymaking and executive branch oversight, where we are also obligated to support our public safety department, to make sure the public safety team has the resources they need.” 

That tension is personal for him. His father was a Longmont officer for 14 years, retiring in 2010. The department’s headcount hasn’t grown meaningfully since, even as the population has increased by approximately 16%. “So when our public safety chief says, ‘If you’re going to take away these cameras, I need more bodies, I agree with them.”

When I asked Marsing about his vote to approve the Axon contract, which struck some community members as a hasty decision, he was direct. 

“It’s not that my thinking changed at all. It’s that my understanding of the reality here on the ground maybe shifted. I did not believe it was going to be possible for us to get cameras fully removed from the city. But what is possible is for us to work with a vendor that has significantly stronger data protection and does not involve a national data sharing model.” 

He has heard the argument that Axon and Flock are the same thing. 

“They’re not the same thing. Yes, the core camera tech is similar, but the back-end data sharing policies, the way that Axon has operated as a company for 20-plus years, do not have the same kind of data sharing practices that made me significantly more uncomfortable with Flock.”

Lask, who is particularly interested in trying to understand Axon’s architecture, agrees that the distinction matters, but stresses that the picture remains frustratingly incomplete. The questions he keeps returning to are technical and specific: when the data is transferred, is it encrypted? What encryption standard applies once it lands on a server? Who has access at that point? How much more secure is Azure Government than Azure?

“The details are just so deep and difficult to explore, even as a technical person,” he said.

One grey area  Lask pointed out is the possible use of an Axon platform called Fusus, marketed as a cloud-based, real-time crime center (RTCC) designed to unify public safety and community intelligence. The platform would allow the city to integrate privately owned cameras, including residential doorbell cameras such as Ring, into the Axon system when camera owners grant access. 

It has not been determined whether Longmont Public Safety will opt-in to this feature. 

Both Council members Marsing and Popkin kept coming back to one distinction above all others: the difference between Flock’s opt-out data sharing model and Axon’s opt-in. With Flock, Longmont’s data was visible to any partnering agency by default unless the city actively shut them out. That, Popkin told me, is how data ends up shared without anyone consciously deciding to share it. 

“That’s an operational default,” he said. “And that’s what other departments across the country are also realizing “‘hey, we didn’t even think to check that setting.’” 

With Axon, the starting point is zero. Longmont has to explicitly grant access agency by agency. 

“We’re keeping it tight,” Popkin said. “And that was part of the direction coming out of December.”

For residents whose anxiety centers on federal immigration enforcement, of which there are many, Popkin was measured but clear. The city cooperates with federal authorities on criminal warrants and active investigations. It does not enforce civil immigration violations. “It’s not Longmont’s role to enforce federal immigration law.” The default settings of the vendor, he argued, matter fundamentally to whether that policy holds in practice. It should be noted, however, that according to the Electronic Frontier Foun

dation (EFF), any resolution that claims to protect local data is null when the state and federal government do not allow cities to withhold data.

There are two other distinctions Popkin raised that have gotten less airtime. The first is that unlike Flock, Axon does not sell or share aggregated data collected through the platform. The second is that Axon does not use Longmont’s data to train AI.

The second distinction involves a platform Longmont already knows. All ALPR data through Axon is stored on Evidence.com, the same platform the department has used for seven years to store body camera footage. Popkin noted the significance of that. Body camera footage captures some of the most sensitive, private moments imaginable: officers entering homes during domestic violence calls, medical emergencies, moments of crisis. 

“That is some of the most personal, sensitive, and private information that we might have on someone,” he said. The department has trusted Axon with that material for nearly a decade. 

The ALPR data, by comparison, Popkin believes, is far less intimate. He notes that this is a photograph of a license plate, and nothing more.

Lask argues that this information, though simple in nature, can still portray an intimate picture of one’s life when aggregated. “Innocuous data adds up to a very personal picture,” he asserted, “your life is small bits of data that in isolation mean nothing, but across time it adds up to context.” The question of who holds that context, and what they can do with it, is where his concern lives. 

I wanted to hear what this conversation looks like from inside the Public Safety Department. I sat down with Police Chief David Moore and Assistant Chief Phil Piotrowski, the people  who are now navigating one of the most scrutinized technology decisions in the city’s recent memory.

Moore stepped into the chief role in October 2025, walking straight into the Flock controversy. He described the moment the Loveland data-sharing scandal broke that summer: “As soon as we found out about it, we took steps to assure that that wouldn’t happen with us.”

There is also a data misconception both officers were eager to address. When an ALPR camera captures a hit, all that exists in Axon’s system is a photograph of the rear of a vehicle and its license plate. No image of the driver. No personal information. Everything else, including the individual’s name, address and the details that make a plate number mean something, comes from NCIC and CCIC, national and state law enforcement databases that have existed for decades and operate entirely independently of any ALPR platform. Officers must verify a plate hit against those databases before making a stop. 

“That’s really important,” Piotrowski said, “because in anything that we do, especially with technology, it’s having that human in the loop to verify and make sure that information is correct, because if we’re not doing that, that’s how we get in trouble.”

At the same time, the national record gives some reason for pause. An 2016 Associated Press investigation found that between 2013 and 2015, more than 325 officers across the country were fired, resigned or suspended for unauthorized database queries, using law enforcement systems to stalk ex-partners, surveil neighbors and dig up dirt on journalists. A decade later, this threat has evolved into a coordinated targeting of constitutional rights. EFF datasets from 2025 reveal that over 50 law enforcement agencies have weaponized ALPRs to physically track protesters and reporters at demonstrations. By bypassing traditional warrant requirements to log hundreds of searches, police are effectively penalizing public assembly and dissenting speech through retroactive surveillance. For some police departments across the country, the human in the loop has been a source of abuse. 

Moore isn’t interested in framing ALPR as a replacement for officers. 

“It will never be a replacement for an officer doing the work,” he told Yellow Scene Magazine. But the math cuts both ways for Moore. “I can’t have someone standing on a corner, or in our case, in 15 different locations in the city, constantly watching for a stolen vehicle to pass or a homicide suspect to pass, and then alerting their fellow officers that, hey, I just saw that car go by,” Moore said, “It’s just not practical, we can’t do that 24/7.” 

The department has 15 cameras, positioned deliberately on main thoroughfares coming in and out of the city, not in residential neighborhoods. 

“We want to know if there’s a wanted felon, a stolen vehicle, a missing person- if they’re leaving or entering the city,” Moore said. “That’s really the use case for us[…]It’s just an invaluable tool when used the right way,” he said.

That phrase “used the right way” is exactly where the community’s anxiety lives, and Moore knows it. The department requires individual logins, dual authentication and a mandatory case justification for every search, backed by annual audit trail reviews. An officer can’t run a plate without logging a reason. “If there’s one mistake you can’t make, it’s an integrity issue,” Moore said plainly. 

Lask respects the intent but questions the scale. Other municipalities have reported query volumes upwards of 20,000 per month. 

“Are we really to believe that, in addition to everything else public safety is doing, someone is going to sit down and read every single entry in an access log and match it to the case and the officer?” 

When asked about alternative methods for secure access, Lask brought up his preference for the warrant system. “If you want to query someone’s phone records, you have to convince a judge it serves the public interest. You could build something similar here- some procedural, documented way to get sign-off from someone with no stake in the case. That keeps with the American tradition of following a process rather than just having unlimited access.” 

The voice you rarely hear in these council chambers, Moore noted, is the victim. This could be the person whose stolen car was recovered, whose case was closed, whose family got an answer. “What I think is lost in these conversations is bringing closure to victims.” Moore emphasized that community engagement is his No. 1 priority, and that the trusting relationship the department has built with city council is too important to jeopardize, especially over a piece of technology.

City council’s oversight measures reflect that same balancing act. The Axon approval came with a one-year review, regular audits and a transparency portal where the public will be able to see what communities Longmont is sharing data with at any given time, which was never possible with Flock. 

Perhaps the most anticipated development is the Technology Policy Advisory Board. Per the draft ordinance presented at the City Council Pre-Session on May 12, 2026, the board will serve to give technology policy recommendations to the council with no administrative or operational authority. Its responsibilities cover three key areas: resident data privacy rights, AI and algorithmic transparency, and camera and surveillance technologies. It will periodically review and update those policies as technology and laws evolve, deliver an annual report with recommendations and weigh in on high-impact technology issues when referred by council.

What surprised me most was learning that the Technology Policy Advisory Board, one of the central demands from the Visible Government League, was something the department itself helped set in motion. “We are not the experts at technology,” Moore said. “What we want are experts in technology that can bring an objective view on what the technology has to offer, what some potholes might be.” 

The board is expected to be seated Jan. 1, 2027.

“This board is going to be able to access and look at the back end of our data in a way that other boards can’t,” Marsing said, “and that’s on purpose, because I want them to be able to get the best possible expertise that they can.” Applications are expected to open in November 2026.

For Palmer, the board is the most meaningful outcome of this entire saga as it will allow the city to intelligently respond to emerging technology and its risks. 

For Lask, his focus  is more personal. As a queer person, he’s acutely aware that the populations most vulnerable to surveillance aren’t always the ones visible in these conversations. “Gender ideology has been declared terrorism-adjacent at the federal level,” he said. “I have friends who are much more vulnerable than I am.” A national network of cameras that can share data across jurisdictions, even informally, is not an abstract threat from where he stands. Recent public records show that when guardrails are weak, local police have used these networks to target specific identities rather than actual crimes. Between 2024 and 2025, over 80 law enforcement agencies across the country used the system to run sweeping searches targeting the Romani community based entirely on racial slurs and stereotypes. For Lask, the worry is how easily a local system can be weaponized against marginalized groups when oversight is left up to the departments themselves.

It’s a reminder that these conversations, however technical they become, are ultimately about the people. While the Axon contract is still being finalized, the advisory board has yet to convene, and privately owned ALPRs continue to operate without the restrictions the city is working to codify, one thing is clear: Longmonters from all walks of life are coming to the table and asking hard questions about the kind of city they want to live in. 

Marsing put it simply: “I remain really impressed by the engagement in our community and the care that folks put into our city, because that is what makes Longmont so special.”

Yellow Scene’s 2026 Summer Support Drive is underway with a goal of 1,000 Sustaining Supporters by summer’s end.

For 26 years, we have remained fiercely independent, free from sponsored content and outside editorial influence.

Reader-driven support keeps local journalism unbossed, unbought, and our journalists fed. Become a sustaining supporter for $8/month and get Yellow Scene delivered to your home.

Join the Summer Support Drive and keep local journalism strong.

The post Longmont Under the Lens As Council Shapes Surveillance Future appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Residents in Lafayette are pushing back against a proposed self-storage facility, arguing that the project would bring an oversized, industrial building to a site that does not fit the surrounding neighborhood.

1784 Capital Holdings LLC is proposing to develop a new 89,592-square-foot, climate-controlled self-storage building, with a caretaker dwelling unit, at 685 Aspen Ridge Drive. According to a Planning Commission memo, the project requires a Special Use Review (SUR) and a Site Plan and Architectural Review (SPAR). Staff analysis notes that SUR criteria include municipal code compliance, environmental impacts, and compatibility with the character of the surrounding area, hours of intrusion, and noise levels. Several residents, like Megan Rast and Christy Clarke, complain that this proposed unit fails to meet these criteria.

This friction stems from the fact that self-storage facilities do not fit neatly into residential or mixed-use districts, meaning developers need special approvals where the use is conditional. Compatibility concerns are the most consistently documented issue, and distance measurements between the building and adjacent homes remain disputed. Because planners increasingly view these facilities as “low-value” land that creates “dead zones” instead of contributing to active, walkable development, cities like Arvada and Denver have enacted moratoriums specifically prohibiting storage facilities in key growth areas.

Beyond land-use compatibility, neighborhood opposition is also driven by pressing safety concerns, particularly regarding fire risk. Colorado has seen multiple self-storage fires in recent years, demonstrating that even with modern construction, these facilities can pose challenges. Across the US, self-storage fires have resulted in major structural damage, destroying dozens to hundreds of units. A study released by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in December 2025 found that these buildings present challenges to fire services due to “compartmentalization and unknown content loads.” The NFPA study argues that modern buildings are larger, more complex, and harder to access than older ones, concluding that departments and owners need to plan together before construction.

Mockup of site plan courtesy of the city

While the Lafayette Comprehensive Plan emphasizes a “connected, vibrant and walkable community” to guide future development, city officials ultimately determined the project met local requirements. In a statement to Yellow Scene Magazine, Lafayette officials said the city council carefully reviewed both the SPAR and SUR criteria before approving the application by a 5-2 vote with conditions. The city emphasized that the decision turned on the evidence in the record and the council’s discretion, particularly its finding that the proposed use was compatible with the surrounding area. Officials also noted that Black Diamond, where the property is located, was zoned industrial in the 1980s, while Anna’s Farm was approved for residential development in 2002–2003 with the acknowledgement that it bordered industrial land.

“City staff believes that the self-storage special use is less impactful to the neighbors than other industrial uses, which can be developed by-right in Black Diamond. Staff’s review was also influenced by the fact that another self-storage facility exists within the Black Diamond subdivision and was previously found to be compatible with the area. The fact that the by-right industrial uses would be more impactful to residents and were found to be compatible in 2002-2003 when residential development associated with the Anna’s Farm subdivision was approved could have been explicitly stated in the staff memo.”

This local dispute reflects a broader pattern for 1784 Capital Holdings, a Denver-based private equity firm that buys industrial and self-storage properties across the West. Its role in Lafayette sits within a larger, national conversation about how investor-driven development occurs on historically and culturally sensitive land. In Maryland, the Bethesda African Cemetery Coalition (BACC) has been struggling since 2017 to protect Moses Macedonia African Cemetery from what it terms “desecration” after 1784 Capital Holdings bought land covering the cemetery to build a multi-level self-storage facility.

“The Bethesda area has extraordinary demographics and extraordinary market fundamentals,” the company’s CEO said in a press release at the time.

“It is a significantly undersupplied market with three times the national average for rent. We chose the site because it’s one of the last zoned and developable parcels of land for self-storage in Bethesda.”

A statement by Kelly McKone of Capital Holdings said that the BACC is “spreading misinformation about the project,” but the coalition maintains that the site is historically significant and may contain human remains. A 2017 independent review by The Ottery Group found that the area was used as a burial ground, though it said more investigation was needed, and the company found evidence that the land was used as a cemetery beginning in 1911.

Capital Holdings did not respond to request to comment.

Back in Lafayette, residents worry that the city is prioritizing developer-driven industrial and storage uses over the day-to-day quality of life in nearby neighborhoods. Christy Clarke discussed this tension in an interview with Yellow Scene Magazine.

“One of the things that I am increasingly considering important is like, if not this situation, then when does public input really matter?” Clarke said. She noted that the bigger question is when public input actually matters if it does not seem to change the outcome, pointing to a perceived fear of litigation. “There seems to be a fear of litigation, with city decisions seemingly driven by the concern that a developer might sue. While legal risk does matter, it shouldn’t outweigh everything else in a planning decision.”

Despite the setback, residents maintain that organizing the opposition brought the community closer together. Clarke emphasized that even if residents ultimately lose this fight, the process has still been worth it if it strengthens community ties and helps future neighborhoods challenge questionable proposals more effectively. Their efforts have already brought people together, and she believes the message should not be that the efforts were wasted, but that residents participated in the democratic process, got to know their neighbors, and perhaps helped set a better precedent for what happens next.

Yellow Scene’s 2026 Summer Support Drive is underway with a goal of 1,000 Sustaining Supporters by summer’s end.

For 26 years, we have remained fiercely independent, free from sponsored content and outside editorial influence.

Reader-driven support keeps local journalism unbossed, unbought, and our journalists fed. Become a sustaining supporter for $8/month and get Yellow Scene delivered to your home.

Join the Summer Support Drive and keep local journalism strong.

The post Lafayette Approves Disputed Self-Storage Facility in 5-2 Vote appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

After the Erie Town Council voted 4-2 to stay with the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) on May 26, some might view the decision as a simple $3 million expenditure. However, the vote represents a deeper commitment to a water strategy marked by rising costs and declining participation, yet defended by supporters as a critical hedge against Colorado’s growing water scarcity.

To reach this decision, the council spent over an hour weighing financial risks against future development needs. Supporters argued that abandoning the project would waste approximately $30 million invested over two decades. Conversely, opponents questioned the wisdom of exposing the town to further financial risk as other communities scale back or withdraw entirely.

Erie remains committed to NISP, which involves diverting high spring flows from the Cache la Poudre River into the planned Glade and Galeton reservoirs. After years of environmental reviews and litigation, the regional project is now nearing major construction. For Erie, NISP is a massive long-term investment originally projected to provide 6,500 acre-feet of water annually—enough for roughly 13,000 households.

Despite its history, council members are increasingly questioning the project’s value. Updated modeling discussed this week suggests a lower participation level of 4,500 acre-feet, prompting concerns that the current economics no longer align with original assumptions. This shift is exacerbated by the departure of participants like the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District, which cited rising costs as a reason for withdrawal.

As other partners have stepped away, Erie’s responsibility has grown. Mayor Andrew Moore noted that the town’s share of the project has climbed from 16% to 23%, increasing its financial exposure. Staff projections indicate Erie could face a $6.44 million contribution in 2027, with water costs estimated between $85,000 and $95,000 per acre-foot—figures that some members noted are higher than Colorado-Big Thompson water shares.

The financial debate is fueled by NISP’s total cost projections, which have jumped from $2 billion to nearly $2.7 billion. While critics point to withdrawals as evidence of a failing model, staff emphasized that Erie lacks a comparable replacement source for such a high volume of water. Proponents further argue that current costs are secondary to the larger issue of long-term resilience.

This decision comes as Colorado faces some of its poorest snowpack levels in recent history, with federal forecasts indicating runoff in parts of the Colorado River Basin could fall below 30% of average. Supporters warned that if NISP fails, competition for existing supplies will intensify, potentially driving water prices even higher.

The divide on council centered on whether NISP is the most responsible way to handle this uncertainty. Mayor Moore framed the project as a question of equity, arguing that current residents should not subsidize infrastructure for new development. Others viewed it as a necessary investment in town-wide water security, noting that leaving would mean forfeiting decades of investment and a future water yield.

Ultimately, the vote to stay does not provide immediate water or lower utility rates; it merely preserves Erie’s stake and its $30 million investment. Mayor Pro Tem Bell and council members Baer, Hoback, and Pesamarrelli carried the motion, while Moore and Council Member Mortellaro voted in opposition.

The decision is far from final, as significantly larger financial commitments are expected by 2027. For now, Erie remains tied to a project that began as a tool for growth but is now a high-stakes gamble on an increasingly dry future.

Yellow Scene’s 2026 Summer Support Drive is underway with a goal of 1,000 Sustaining Supporters by summer’s end.

For 26 years, we have remained fiercely independent, free from sponsored content and outside editorial influence.

Reader-driven support keeps local journalism unbossed, unbought, and our journalists fed. Become a sustaining supporter for $8/month and get Yellow Scene delivered to your home.

Join the Summer Support Drive and keep local journalism strong.

The post Erie Votes 4-2 to Stay in NISP as Town’s Financial Stake Rises appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

More than 100 Erie residents are now asking Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser to review the town’s controversial mineral rights process, and a Boulder attorney has formally challenged the town’s handling of consultant contracts and procurement procedures.

The twin actions come less than a week before Erie Town Council is scheduled to vote on a proposed mineral rights agreement with SM Energy, a deal that a minority of supporters say would provide significant financial benefits and operational protections for the town.

For many residents, however, the debate is no longer focused solely on the merits of the proposed agreement. Instead, concerns have shifted toward the process used to negotiate it. 

Over the past several months, residents have raised questions about the town’s selection of Alameda Mineral Advisors, the extensive use of executive sessions during negotiations and the role of consultant Matthew Owens, who acknowledged during a June 2 study session that he did not complete the competitive bid solicitation process outlined in his contract with the town. Owens later said he had been instructed not to do so.

When asked who provided that instruction, Owens said it came from “the people that hired me.”  Because Owens was hired specifically to evaluate and market the town’s mineral assets, his admission became central to the legal and ethical criticism against the process. 

Pictured Owens being questioned regarding competitive bidding process

Town officials have acknowledged that discussions surrounding the proposed mineral rights transaction began as early as September 2025. However, details of those negotiations remained largely out of public view until February 2026, when the issue first came to broader public attention through Yellow Scene reporting on an offer for the town’s mineral rights.

Those unanswered questions (and the months-long gap between private discussions and public disclosure) prompted Erie resident Steven Drew to seek outside review.

Drew said he spent months attending meetings, reviewing contracts and attempting to obtain information about the mineral rights negotiations before concluding that residents had exhausted their options at the local level.

“The short answer from the town was we had no rights in this process,” Drew said.

“So where I ended up was in a void where this behavior had no recourse except for those two areas, and that is the attorney general and the civil process.”

On June 11, Drew and more than 100 residents signed a letter asking the Colorado Attorney General’s Office to review the mineral rights process before council votes on the proposed agreement. The signatories include current and former Erie residents, former public officials and professionals with backgrounds in transportation, environmental protection and public administration. The letter alleges that town officials bypassed competitive procurement requirements, failed to conduct required bid solicitations and relied heavily on executive-session discussions during negotiations.

Drew said the goal is not to prevent council from making a decision, but to ensure residents can trust the process that produced it. If the Attorney General’s Office chooses to review the allegations, it could provide the first outside examination of the mineral rights process. 

The same day, Louisville attorney Darren O’Connor, representing Drew, sent a formal demand letter to the town seeking records and explanations related to the mineral rights negotiations. The letter challenges both the consultant procurement process and Owens’ failure to perform the bid solicitation work described in his contract. It also requests documentation showing who instructed Owens not to complete that work and asks the town to delay final action on the proposed agreement until those questions are resolved.

The issue surfaced publicly again during Tuesday night’s council meeting when a motion to enter executive session failed on a 4-3 vote. Councilmembers Emily Baer, Dan Hoback and Anil Pesamarelli voted against entering the closed-door session, citing concerns about transparency and the amount of public business being discussed outside public view. The disagreement led to a tense exchange among council members over issues that have emerged throughout the mineral rights debate. In an interview with Yellow Scene following the meeting, Councilmember Dan Hoback said he was unaware of any public vote, council consensus or contract amendment authorizing a change to Owens’ responsibilities.

“We never went to a straw vote or a poll … certainly not consensus,” Hoback said. “I’m quite sure [council as a whole] never consented to anything of that nature.”

Hoback said that if Owens was instructed not to complete the competitive solicitation process required by his contract, he does not know who gave that instruction.

“If we went behind those doors and modified that contract, well, we broke the law”,Hoback said.

Hoback added that he was unaware of any communication authorizing such a change. “I was not a part of any emails and texts,” he said. “I’m wondering where [Moore] got that.”

Mayor Andrew Moore and Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell have defended the use of executive sessions, arguing that certain negotiations and real-estate matters cannot be conducted publicly without undermining the town’s position. A few supporters of the SM Energy agreement have also argued that the deal secures valuable concessions, protections and financial benefits for Erie.

Whether the Attorney General’s Office takes action before the June 16 vote remains unclear. What is clear is that the controversy has expanded beyond the proposed agreement itself. For a growing number of residents, the central question is no longer whether the deal is good or bad, but whether the process used to reach it followed the town’s own rules.

Yellow Scene reached out to each town council member for comment and did not receive a response.

Yellow Scene’s 2026 Summer Support Drive is underway with a goal of 1,000 Sustaining Supporters by summer’s end.

For 26 years, we have remained fiercely independent, free from sponsored content and outside editorial influence.

Reader-driven support keeps local journalism unbossed, unbought, and our journalists fed. Become a sustaining supporter for $8/month and get Yellow Scene delivered to your home.

Join the Summer Support Drive and keep local journalism strong.

The post Erie residents demand answers before pivotal mineral rights vote appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The following is a letter from Erie residents that was sent to Yellow Scene Magazine. We are publishing it in pursuit of community transparency and public accountability. Signed by over 100 community members, the letter calls on the Colorado Attorney General to intervene in the ongoing, controversial sale of local mineral rights.

Dear Attorney General Weiser,

This letter is from Erie residents related to the Town of Erie and the potential sale of Town-owned mineral rights and real estate assets to SM Energy (Civitas). This is a legal and ethical matter where there is no recourse for these issues at the Town level. 

We are reaching out to you for State assistance to investigate and hopefully resolve these matters on behalf of residents of the Town of Erie. Please note that I have been in correspondence with your office prior, but the situation has grown more urgent. 

The Council is set to vote on the sale of these mineral rights Tuesday, June 16th. In open meetings and during the Study Session on June 2nd it was revealed that several important and legal steps were not completed in this process including:

1. The Town Council signed a Consultant contract involving a bid and solicitation process that was ignored in favor of a single-source agreement with SM Energy; and
2. Town of Erie policy required the issuance of an RFP to select the Consultant in a $4.5 million contract and, instead, the Consultant was sole-sourced without vetting.

The Town of Erie Town Council has placed a significant amount of information related to this transaction within Executive Sessions. Please note that this timeline and information are based on what has been made publicly available to-date.

MINERAL RIGHTS SALE TIMELINE

In December 2025, four Town Council Members led by Mayor Andrew Moore approved the hire of Alameda Minerals Partners as a sole-source $4.5 million contract to represent the Town of Erie in the potential sale of Town-owned mineral rights. However, this was done behind closed doors, of which the public did not learn of the discussions that had been occurring for over a year until Feb 2026 when local reporting revealed it. 

• Alameda Minerals Partners CEO is Matthew Owens, a founder of Civitas Energy (now SM Energy) who owned the Draco Pad at that time. The Town Council did not vet Owens for financial conflicts of interest and, at a later date, Mayor Moore advised that he knew Owens had ongoing financial interests with Civitas.
• When asked why the Town did not issue an RFP for this $4.5 million contract, Town employee David Frank is on record stating they did not seek any other consultants, and that “they didn’t know any other consultants.” Not knowing is a core reason as to why RFPs are conducted.
• There are three versions of how Owens and the Town of Erie started working together. The Mayor stating he had a conversation, then others stating Owens came to the Town. Regardless, it appears that the Mayor was in talks with Owens for 6 months before the council was aware. 
• This was a sole-sourced contract without an RFP. The Town Interim Manager advised the Council during a June 2nd Study Session that this violated Town procurement policy. 
• Per the Contract with the Town, Alameda Minerals Partners was required to run a competitive bid and solicitation process and to provide those results to the Town Council. The public learned during the June 2nd Town of Erie Study Session that Owens did not run this process and that Town Council members have not seen competitive bids.
• Owens indicated during the meeting and stated specifically to a reporter after the meeting that he was advised by certain Town Council members to not run a competitive bid and procurement process.
• The public has limited information about discussions, processes and details around this potential transaction as Mayor Moore has held both confidential and traditionally non-confidential information within rolling Executive Sessions. This includes inappropriate direction from the Town Council to Owens to breach his Contract and not conduct competitive bid and solicitations.
• The process run by Owens resulted in a single offer from SM Energy (Civitas), his former company. There is no record that Owens reached out to competitors, confirmed by the acting Town Administrator and Town Attorney, as well as Owens himself
• The Town Council was advised by Erie residents during the June 9th Town Council open session about this breach of contract and how this violates Town Council’s role in that contract as well as Town Council fiduciary duty.
• The contract from SM Energy appears to be significantly one-sided in favor of SM Energy. The Town’s financial and negotiation representation through Owens and his conflicts of interest may have had a significant impact on the terms of agreement and the value of the Town’s assets.
• Mayor Moore set a vote for June 16th to approve the offer from SM Energy. Per Moore’s voting block of four Town Council members, residents expect this contract to be approved in a 4-3 vote.

Residents are clearly against this decision and have been showing up and speaking out in large numbers since learning about it. What adds another layer is that SM Energy has a timeline to meet per the ECMC and Erie holding onto their mineral rights requires them to work around that location. With ownership it opens up their access considerably. Mayor Moore has been meeting in secret for months, and rushing the process without proper vetting and without following proper RFP procedures. Mayor Moore is placing this single-source contract with SM Energy up for vote on June 16th knowing that a competitive bid and solicitation process was required, but not completed. 

For these reasons we believe the Attorney General should step in to ensure this process is meeting the legal standards at the State level, set in the Consultant contract and the Town Charter. 

TOWN OF ERIE RESIDENTS

The following Town of Erie residents agreed to be part of this letter and are asking for direct assistance from the Office of The Attorney General.

• Steven Drew

• Deborah Cameron

• Leah Burns

• Tim Burns

• Selena Maranjian

• Kelli Bercovitch

• Maria Veronica Drew

• Amy Mitchell

• Bill Rigler

• Chelsea Campbell

• Sunshine Axlund

• Eric Axlund 

• Tiffany Breaux Pritchett 

• Mari Hobkirk 

• Neha Pesaramelli 

• DeWayne D. Drummond

• Karen Drummond

• Rosy Maranjian 

• John McAllister

• Gloria Pearlstein

• Ann Manette Ansay

• Tonia Sharp

• Martha Dasovic

• Barbara Nichols 

• William Geithman

• Donna Geithman 

• Helen Hoekstra

• Barb Benner 

• Diana Middleton

• Luanne Lee

• Forrest Johnson

• Nancy Cacy 

• Sharleen Bakeman, Retired Colorado DOT & USDOT

• Dr. Mark E. Bakeman, Retired Washington State DOT

• Carol Campbell, Retired Assistant Regional Administrator, Office of Ecosystems Protection and Remediation, US EPA Region 8Marifay Makssour

• Elaine Patriquin

• Colleen Dame

• Laurel Warner 

• Jennifer Herrin

• Amanda Tuominen 

• Gerry Wright

• Jim McGlashan

• Suzy Swanson 

• Steve Swanson 

• Barbara Kusinitz 

• Chanel K. Adams

• Ryan C. Adams

• Cheryl Kelso 

• Charlene Kam

• Steve Kelso

• Louise Hannahoe 

• Kim Hannahoe 

• John Ghumm

• Shavonne Blades 

• Emily Brecht 

• Robert de Jong

• Donna Lasater

• James Salvaggio

• Peg Salvaggio

• Barb Mejer

• Nancy Loehr

• Danny Loehr

• Jackie Connor 

• Penny T. Landis

• Debbie Shinn

• Frank Landis

• Rabbi Frederick Greene 

• Deborah Greene

• James Stull

• Penny Stull

• Donna Thumma

• John Thumma

• Robin Berlin 

• Karyn Lankford 

• Sharon Matayus

• Lindsey Terranova

• Adam Terranova

• Winfried Reichelt 

• Mari Hobkirk

• Rebecca Robb

• Bob Braudes

• Cherry Landen

• Cammie Arneson

• Jeanne DeVries

• Donna Smith

• Elaine Green 

• Donna Canode 

• Patricia Reed

• Wyncia Clute

• Larry Kinney

• Lauren Fulton

• Sharon Schuessler

• Ann Cohrs

• Steve Nelson

• Jacquelynn Sigl

• Laura Schmid

• Brian Schmid

• Justin Brooks

• Ashlee White

• Montgomery White

• Samanth Julie Hosmer

• Julie Gleason

• Kelly Wagner-Grull

• Amy Wagner-Grull

• Lenore Kingston 

• Michiko Elizabeth Mackanin 

• Christiaan van Woudenberg

• Kristen Moore

• Robyn Levey

• Aaron Levey

• Leticia Clendenen

• Krystyn Mitchell

• Heather Sabo

• Derek Webb

• Jenni Glomb

• Lyle Brecht

• Lorrie McAllister 

• Meghan Hughes 

• Josh Gaffga 
• Beth Gaffga

The post Over 100 Erie Residents Sign Letter To Attorney General appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Following Erie citizens’ approval of home rule in 2023, supporters argued that moving to the new system would empower Erie with better decision-making ability as the town continued to grow rapidly. However, less than two years after this historic vote, Erie continues to make crucial decisions in which the town’s future increasingly becomes defined by a stable four-member coalition on the Town Council that has consistently banded together on several of Erie’s major controversies.

These voting patterns have been observed on multiple occasions. Mayor Moore, Mayor Pro Tem Bell, and Town Council Members O’Connor and Mortellaro vote in favor; Town Council Members Pesaramelli, Baer and Hoback vote against the motions. During debates over Pride Flag policy, community grant programs, urban renewal financing, marijuana regulations, board reconfiguration, sustainability plans, annexation agreements, and redevelopment tools, the pattern is consistent.

Not all council decisions pit the two factions against each other, especially on issues related to the town’s physical development. Erie’s council has routinely agreed on road construction, water utility infrastructure upgrades, flood management initiatives, policing services, and even some development applications. It is primarily on issues relating to governance, civic identity, administrative structure and financing initiatives that these opposing factions tend to form.

Erie’s post-home-rule Town Council is clearly showing two sides when it comes to the future of the fast-growing town. The four-member majority seems to support policies that facilitate institutional expansion, structured governance, and regional cooperation, while a three-member minority consistently opposes these types of initiatives. The disagreements extend beyond headline-making issues like Pride Flag policy and marijuana legalization to other lesser-known policies such as board reconfigurations, grant oversight, metro district management and redevelopment tools.

Erie’s council appears committed to increasing the town’s use of urban renewal authorities, tax increment financing, redevelopment districts, and urban planning agreements as tools for long-term growth planning.

For instance, the council unanimously approved the town’s urban renewal plan for Erie Town Center and related tax increment financing agreements with Boulder County, the St. Vrain Valley School District, the Mountain View Fire Protection District and other entities. The plan officially designated certain areas of Erie Town Center as redevelopment areas and allowed for financing arrangements where any increase in tax revenue can be used for those purposes.

This represents another in a string of initiatives that use urban renewal and tax increment financing as tools to finance infrastructure and redevelopment efforts. The year prior, Erie Town Council had already approved a comparable urban renewal plan and associated tax increment financing mechanism for the Erie Gateway. Supporters believe these are necessary tools for the town to remain competitive with neighboring communities along the Front Range.

However, critics increasingly wonder how much oversight is possible once these complicated financing districts are created.

Some of these debates emerged over annexation and development agreements.

For example, during March 2024, the Town Council approved an annexation and zoning agreement for the controversial multi-family housing project proposed by Thompson Thrift for 111th Street and Arapahoe Road after widespread opposition over concerns about density, flooding, increased traffic congestion, and strained infrastructure systems resulting from rapid growth. Despite the opposition, the council voted to approve the annexation of the parcel.

The vote illustrated the lack of perfect ideological consistency when it came to growth.

Dan Hoback often aligns himself with the council minority on governance and civic-policy disputes but was supportive of this annexation, which shows Erie Town Council doesn’t have exact ideological consistency regarding growth policies and initiatives.

However, in general, what seems more apparent in these voting patterns is that the Town Council is divided regarding governance and civic philosophies rather than over the topic of growth.

Indeed, the recurring majority seems to be united behind one particular vision for the town – one that sees Erie transitioning into a metropolitan-style community.

This vision has appeared throughout multiple discussions involving sustainability planning, transportation coordination and administrative governance reformation.

The council adopted Erie’s Climate and Sustainability Action Plan Agreement in January 2025 and went on to adopt initiatives related to beneficial electrification, air quality agreements, and floating solar energy systems at the Erie water reclamation facilities. The council also unanimously approved a range of agreements related to regional transportation coordination.

These include an RTD inclusion plan, the launch of Erie Flex Ride Transit Service, and Southwest Weld County Transportation Coordination.

On top of all of this, the majority has also repeatedly supported procedural and governance changes within town government.

An example of this appeared during the September 2025 special council meeting when the council decided by a vote of 4-3 to reduce board and commission terms. This happened following the restructuring of the entire municipal governance framework after home rule approval.

The vote occurred after a heated discussion between Council Member Emily Baer and the rest of the council in which she argued the initiative showed disrespect toward volunteers serving on the town’s various boards and commissions. 

Nevertheless, the council decided to go through with the reorganization as directed by staff. In addition to this governance reform, the majority has approved tightening the rules for Erie’s community grant programs and non-profits.

After adopting more detailed procedures in August 2025, opponents expressed concerns that the town will burden local cultural events with unnecessary bureaucratic requirements. The council, on the other hand, believes that these are necessary measures to ensure accountability among taxpayer programs.

Many of these debates around accountability and governance were brought to head during one of the most divisive council meetings in 2025 – the Pride Flag Policy meeting.

As the crowd packed the chambers, Council Member Emily Baer introduced a motion to add a discussion regarding the installation of Pride Flags at Town Hall to the meeting agenda. This was quickly approved by the council in a 6-1 vote where the Mayor alone voted against adding the motion.

However, the issue of what should be done regarding Pride flags was left unresolved.

In response, Mayor Andrew Moore introduced the motion to direct the Town Attorney to draft policies regarding these Pride flags. The measure received 4-3 support from the council, with Andew Moore, Brandon Bell, Brian O’Connor and John Mortellaro approving the direction to staff while the minority trio opposed the motion.

This vote echoed an earlier disagreement over marijuana policy in September 2024. The council passed regulations related to marijuana land use and licensing after months of deliberation, with council members Sawusch and Bell opposing the policy. 

The marijuana policy discussion highlighted yet again the fluid nature of alliances based on policy. However, it also illustrated the fact that the topics of civic identity and governance seem to generate the sharpest divisions.

Moreover, Erie’s most ambitious redevelopment projects continue to receive broad support from the council majority.

The council unanimously approved multiple agreements tied to Erie’s Town Center Development Strategy, including amendments to development agreements with Evergreen-County Line & Erie Parkway LLC. Council members also approved additional agreements related to Colliers Hill urban renewal financing, flood-control infrastructure, roadway feasibility studies and redevelopment-related land acquisitions. 

Most of the aforementioned votes were unanimously approved by the council, however, their cumulative effect amounts to multi-million dollar commitments to infrastructure development and redevelopment.

This combination of ambitious redevelopment projects coupled with divisive political debates reflects the very nature of Erie’s political transformation.

Erie is no longer just a semi-rural town governed locally.

Rather, it’s a growing municipality that makes decisions involving regional transportation agreements, urban renewal districts, annexations, sustainability strategies, regional water infrastructure coordination, and multi-million dollar redevelopment financing projects.

The political question, therefore, is no longer whether Erie should undergo development.

Erie is developing.

What needs to be addressed instead is how Erie’s growth priorities are shaped, who controls those decisions, and how those projects are financed.

The majority faction at the council appears comfortable facilitating Erie’s transition to a more metropolitan-style community using the new home-rule powers.

The minority faction, however, opposes moves toward increasing government complexity, suggesting that Erie risks losing transparency and its traditional character in the process.

This struggle will define the next phase of Erie politics. As redevelopment projects begin, annexation fights escalate, and more sophisticated financing tools are used, Erie residents will be called upon to trust more than just developers – they’ll also have to trust their elected representatives in directing Erie’s future.

Journalism That Answers To Readers

The post The 4–3 Split: How Rapid Growth is Fracturing Erie’s Politics appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Erie Town Council is discussing a proposal for a north-south connector road near Erie Municipal Airport. The proposal became controversial following the release of feasibility study on May 5 that found the project would cost roughly $50 million, face major environmental and regulatory hurdles, and save drivers only about 2 minutes of travel time.

The plan l, known as the Airpark North-South Connectivity Study, would connect County Line Road to Colorado Highway 7 through or near airport property south of Vista Parkway. 

At Erie’s April 2 State of the Town event, Mayor Andrew Moore described the proposal as an exploratory effort intended to relieve congestion on Vista Parkway while potentially unlocking economic development opportunities near the airport.

“This is a thought and I just want to stress this is a thought,” Moore said during the event. “This is not a done deal. We’re waiting for the feasibility study to come back.”

Mayor Moore explaining the project to residents at the State of the Town Meeting, April 2.

Moore argued that a new connection to Highway 7 could divert traffic away from Vista Parkway, which experienced increased traffic after County Line Road was rerouted westward as part of Erie’s settlement with Lafayette. He also emphasized the possibility of future commercial growth.

“If you can get the road there, all of a sudden land on both sides of that road becomes economically viable where it isn’t as viable today for economic reasons,” Moore said. “Businesses that could come in there.”

But the feasibility study presented to council May 5 painted a far more complicated picture.

According to town staff and consultants, both proposed roadway alternatives would cost between $49 million and $50 million before right-of-way acquisition costs. 

Alternate routes of the Airpark North-South Connectivity project, presented by town staff on May 5.The study found the routes would provide only about two minutes of travel-time savings compared to existing routes via Coal Creek Boulevard.

The report also concluded that both alternatives scored below 0.50 on benefit-cost analysis metrics commonly used for federal transportation funding competitiveness, making outside funding uncertain.

Staff presentations identified several “high risk” barriers to the project, including floodplain impacts, complications involving a Highway 7 signalized connection requiring Colorado Department of Transportation approval, and impacts to already entitled land uses. Environmental approvals were labeled a “moderate risk.”

Jason Neumeyer Director of Survey Research speaks about feasibility study

The project corridor crosses Coal Creek floodplain areas that would require FEMA review and approval, according to the presentation.

Perhaps most notably, the study’s feasibility findings showed that the staff did not recommend moving forward with either major connector alternative. Instead, staff recommended continued buildout of Coal Creek Boulevard, improvements to Vista Parkway, and developer-funded Airport Drive signal enhancements.

Those conclusions fueled sharp disagreement during the May 5 study session.

Councilmember Dan Hoback argued the project should end immediately, calling the proposal “a solution to nothing.” He also criticized the design concept as unsafe and inconsistent with Erie’s standards. “That’s not a gateway. That’s an alleyway and it’s unsafe for pedestrians and bikes at a horrific cost.” 

Another point of contention centered on whether the road would meaningfully reduce traffic congestion at all. The feasibility study’s traffic redistribution estimates showed only modest reductions in traffic volumes on Vista Parkway and surrounding roads.

Still, Moore resisted fully abandoning the concept, instead advocating for keeping future options open while gathering additional traffic data and exploring whether alternate alignments or developer participation could reduce costs.

During the meeting, developers connected to nearby projects warned that prolonged uncertainty surrounding the roadway could affect planning timelines and investments already underway. Councilmembers also discussed whether continued staff work on the project would take resources away from existing priorities.

At one point, officials acknowledged the connector project is not currently part of Erie’s active work plan.

The contrast between the State of the Town presentation and the May feasibility study discussion shows gaps in public discussion of issues. While the April presentation emphasized congestion relief and economic potential, the May study session focused heavily on floodplain permitting, multimillion-dollar bridge costs, weak funding potential and uncertainty over whether the road would substantially improve traffic conditions at all.

For now,the council  has given no formal direction to proceed or terminate the proposal. Instead, officials appeared split between those who see the concept as a long-term economic and transportation opportunity and those who view it as an expensive, high-risk project searching for a problem to solve.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays ready to lead, no matter who’s in charge.

The post Erie’s airport connector road faces scrutiny after feasibility study appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

For years, Colorado’s Front Range passenger rail proposal, a long-running effort to create a rail alternative along the heavily congested Interstate 25 corridor, has existed as one of the state’s most persistent transportation ambitions. Now branded the Colorado Connector, or “CoCo,” the project is shifting from concept to early-stage development, bringing renewed scrutiny over cost, funding structure, environmental claims, and long-term viability.

Supporters describe the proposed system as a long-overdue investment in regional mobility that could reduce traffic congestion, improve transportation access, and support economic growth across one of the fastest-growing corridors in the western United States. Critics, however, argue the project carries financial risks and operational uncertainties that could leave taxpayers absorbing long-term subsidies without guaranteed ridership returns.

At the center of the debate is a core question: can Colorado build a passenger rail system that is both functional and financially sustainable?

The Front Range Passenger Rail District envisions a phased rail system connecting Fort Collins, Denver, Colorado Springs, and eventually Pueblo.,The current focus is an initial starter service between Fort Collins and Denver, which planners describe as the most viable first step due to existing infrastructure and population density along the northern Front Range. Recent regional funding actions include approximately $332 million in approved support through RTD and the Colorado Infrastructure Office for early-stage development tied to the starter corridor.

Sal Pace pictured

According to Sal Pace, General Manager of the Front Range Passenger Rail District, the starter service is designed to begin operations in 2029, with three daily round trips between Fort Collins and Denver.

“The initial starter service for the Colorado Connector is estimated at approximately $330 million and will deliver round-trip service between Fort Collins and Denver three times daily beginning in 2029,” Pace said in a statement provided to Yellow Scene. “What makes this approach different is that Colorado is leveraging existing rail infrastructure and partnering directly with freight rail operators, rather than building an entirely new rail corridor from scratch.”

Pace added that the long-term vision includes expansion southward toward Colorado Springs and Pueblo, with potential service extensions targeted around 2032. The phased approach is central to the project’s funding and political strategy, allowing officials to demonstrate early service viability before committing to full corridor buildout. However, the broader financial structure of the project continues to generate debate. Depending on infrastructure requirements, service frequency, station development, and long-term corridor improvements, publicly discussed estimates for the Colorado Connector range from hundreds of millions for initial service to multi-billion-dollar projections for full Front Range expansion. Transportation infrastructure projects of this scale routinely require long-term public investment, but critics argue passenger rail presents unique financial exposure because operating costs continue indefinitely after construction is complete. These costs include staffing, maintenance, fuel or power supply, equipment replacement, insurance, and ongoing infrastructure upkeep.

Drafted path for proposed Railway.

One of the most contested concerns is the potential long-term subsidy required per rider. Some critics have pointed to analyses suggesting costs could approach or exceed $1 per passenger mile depending on final ridership performance and operational conditions. While not an official projection from the district, the figure has become a focal point in broader public debate about rail efficiency compared to other transportation modes. Critics argue that when full lifecycle costs are considered — including infrastructure, operations, and maintenance — passenger rail systems can become significantly more expensive per traveler than driving or commercial air travel on a per-mile basis, particularly if ridership falls below projections. Supporters counter that such comparisons often ignore the broader context of transportation funding in the United States. Highways, airports, and roadway systems also rely heavily on public investment and ongoing subsidies, even if those costs are less visible in fare structures.

According to Pace, the Colorado Connector is designed as a cost-conscious model that prioritizes existing infrastructure to reduce upfront construction costs and accelerate delivery timelines.

“What makes the Colorado Connector notable is that we have intentionally structured it as a cost-conscious public-private partnership that leverages existing infrastructure rather than pursuing far more expensive new rail construction,” Pace said.

He added that all major transportation systems require sustained public investment and that passenger rail should not be evaluated differently in that regard.

The debate ultimately reflects a broader policy question: whether transportation systems should be evaluated by direct cost recovery or by broader impacts such as congestion relief, mobility access, environmental benefit, and long-term economic development.

Colorado’s Front Range corridor continues to experience significant population growth, placing increasing pressure on Interstate 25 and surrounding road networks. Commuters regularly experience variable travel times between Fort Collins, Denver, and Colorado Springs, with congestion driven by population growth, tourism, construction, and accident-related delays. Rail supporters argue that highway expansion alone cannot sustainably accommodate future demand. However, operational challenges remain central to skepticism towards the Colorado Connector as a solution.

The Colorado Connector is expected to rely heavily on existing freight rail corridors during its initial phases, rather than constructing dedicated passenger rail lines. While this approach reduces construction costs significantly, it also introduces limitations related to scheduling coordination, freight priority, travel speeds, and service frequency. Passenger trains operating on shared freight corridors must often navigate dispatch constraints that can affect reliability and consistency compared to dedicated passenger systems Critics argue these constraints may reduce the system’s competitiveness against driving, particularly if service frequency or travel times do not meet public expectations.

Environmental considerations are also a major part of the project’s public messaging. Passenger rail is generally promoted as a lower-emission alternative to single-occupancy vehicle travel, and Colorado Connector has been framed as aligned with broader state efforts to reduce transportation emissions. However, the planned use of diesel or diesel-hybrid equipment during early operations has drawn scrutiny. At the time of publication, the Front Range Passenger Rail District had not provided additional comment from Tara Trujillo regarding the diesel implementation phase. District leadership has stated that diesel-hybrid equipment is intended to provide operational flexibility across existing freight infrastructure while reducing startup costs and allowing service to launch more quickly.

Though Pace noted, that future technological improvements in rail propulsion may allow for cleaner operating systems down the line. 

The tension between long-term environmental goals and near-term operational realities remains one of the most closely watched aspects of the project.

As Colorado moves toward potential implementation, the success of the Colorado Connector will likely depend less on initial branding and more on execution — including ridership levels, service reliability, and long-term financial performance. For now, the project remains suspended between vision and verification, with its ultimate outcome still uncertain. Whether it becomes a defining transportation investment or a costly lesson in infrastructure ambition will depend on whether projected benefits align with real-world performance once service begins.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays ready to lead, no matter who’s in charge.

The post The Colorado Connector: Visionary Transit or Costly Gamble? appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

House Bill 26-1337 moved through fiscal revision this morning, advancing a legislative effort to expand Colorado’s nuclear energy footprint. The bill establishes an ambitious state policy to begin construction on at least one nuclear project by 2040. To streamline development, the measure designates the Colorado Energy Office as the central permitting coordinator, providing a single point of contact to help developers navigate complex regulatory hurdles. The bill also incentivizes utility participation by allowing companies to recoup up to $20 million in expenditures for necessary siting and design studies.

The recent fiscal revision transforms these policy goals into an operational framework by creating the “Advanced Nuclear Energy and Technical Assistance Office.” This office will be staffed by a dedicated state nuclear engineer and a project manager. Rather than drawing from general tax dollars, the office will be self-funded through an annual fee of up to $1.15 million charged to developing utilities.

HB26-1337 passed the House Energy & Environment Committee last week with a narrow 7–6 vote. While all Republican committee members supported the measure, Democrats were split. High-profile party members like Representative Junie Joseph voted against it, while Democrats Alex Valdez (a co-sponsor), Amy Paschal, and Manny Rutinel joined Republicans to advance the bill. Ty Winter, a co-sponsor, described the legislation as a “meaningful step for nuclear energy and Colorado’s energy future.” He also praised nuclear power for providing “reliable base load power, good-paying blue-collar jobs and stability for energy-producing communities.”

Valdez and Winter did not respond to requests for further comment by the time of publication.

Despite this support, the bill faces intense opposition from grassroots organizations. The Colorado Renewable Energy Society (CRES) issued a formal letter of opposition, arguing that “nuclear is the exact opposite of clean” because it produces waste that remains “dangerously radioactive for tens of thousands of years.” CRES also highlighted the economic risks, citing Georgia’s Vogtle Units 3 and 4 as a warning. Those reactors were completed seven years behind schedule at a cost of $36.8 billion, leading to a 23.7% increase in ratepayer bills. Opponents further argued that the 15-year timeline for nuclear construction is too slow compared to the one-to-two-year window for wind and solar projects.

Ean Tafoya of Colorado GreenLatinos told the Colorado Sun that the bill is a “tone-deaf […] betrayal” of environmental justice. Critics also raised concerns regarding the high water-usage rates required for nuclear facilities, a sensitive issue as many Colorado cities face chronic droughts.

The bill’s future remains uncertain as it faces a deadline of May 13, 2026, when the General Assembly adjourns. To become law, it must pass second and third readings in the House before moving through the Senate. CRES has already begun mobilizing opposition by releasing a voter toolkit to help citizens vocalize their concerns to lawmakers.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays ready to lead, no matter who’s in charge.

The post Nuclear Split: GOP and Key Democrats Push Through Nuclear Bill appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Senate Bill 26-097, a Colorado bill that would have decriminalized commercial sexual activity throughout the state, was dropped a few weeks ago just hours before it was set to come up for a first vote in the state Capitol. The legislation sought to repeal state criminal offenses related to sex work, including soliciting, patronizing, and owning or controlling a place for such activity. While the bill would have maintained penalties for pandering involving intimidation, its primary goal was to replace the term “prostitution” with “commercial sexual activity” to distinguish consensual work from exploitation.

This distinction is central to the argument for reform, as supporters suggest that current law conflates consensual adult sex work with human trafficking. While trafficking relies on force, fraud, or coercion, sex work involves consensual activity between adults. Proponents argue that removing criminal penalties is not an endorsement of the industry but a recognition that criminalization pushes the trade further underground. This displacement makes it harder for law enforcement to identify genuine trafficking victims and harder for those victims to seek help.

State Senator Nick Hinrichsen, sponsor of the stalled SB 26-097, photographed in 2022. Photo from Jeffrey Beall

Despite these arguments, the bill failed to gain the political momentum necessary for a hearing. State Senator Nick Hinrichsen, a lead sponsor, confirmed that the measure lacked the votes to clear the Senate Judiciary Committee. Rather than advancing the bill to a contentious hearing where sex workers feared public exposure and harassment, Hinrichsen chose to postpone the legislation indefinitely. “Without the votes to get the bill out of committee, it was not worth the risk,” he told Colorado Politics. Though he is not running for re-election, Hinrichsen noted that the effort was a significant step in educating the public on why the current system fails.

The safety concerns cited by Colorado supporters are mirrored in other jurisdictions and research. In Maine, selling sex has been decriminalized to make reporting crimes easier, and research from New Zealand suggests that decriminalization allows workers to feel more able to refuse dangerous clients. Pasha Ripley, founder of Parasol Patrol and executive director of Red Light Sources International, argues that criminalization creates a “perceived institutional impunity” for those who commit violence against workers. As Ripley told Yellow Scene Magazine, “Criminalizing sex work does not end exploitation, it just makes it more dangerous.”

Beyond local laws, federal actions like SESTA-FOSTA have further complicated the safety landscape for sex workers. While intended to stop trafficking, these laws shut down websites that workers used to vet clients and negotiate safety. Researcher Danielle Blunt notes that these policy failures often stem from a lack of direct engagement with the community.

Advocates in London demand legal protection and decriminalization outside the Houses of Parliament in 2019. Similar global movements for safety and autonomy informed the arguments behind Colorado’s stalled Senate Bill 26-097.
Photo from Koca Vehbi

“They’re coming at it from an academic standpoint with no real experience. And a lot of what they’re asking about is based on stereotypes,” Blunt told WHYY.

This disconnect suggests that media portrayals and academic research often ignore the violent crimes and safety issues workers face due to their legal status.

The failure of Senate Bill 97 highlights a persistent gap in how society regulates sexual activity and addresses exploitation. For many advocates, the exclusion of sex workers’ voices is the primary reason for their ongoing vulnerability. Any successful future policy will likely require lawmakers to center the voices of those most affected by the law to ensure it provides meaningful protection rather than further marginalization.

While the bill is stalled for now, the debate over autonomy and harm reduction remains active in the state Capitol. Hinrichsen remains hopeful that the conversation will eventually lead to a policy that prioritizes the safety of all involved. As he told Yellow Scene, “big changes do not often happen on the first attempt. Some policies can be a major shift, and they can take time.”

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays ready to lead, no matter who’s in charge.

The post Why Colorado’s Sex Work Decriminalization Bill Vanished appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

At recent public meetings in Erie, Colorado, residents have pressed town officials on whether growth can be slowed, citing concerns about water supply, traffic and infrastructure capacity.

But town officials may have their hands tied.

A review of town planning documents, development agreements and recent approvals shows that a substantial portion of Erie’s future housing, land use and infrastructure commitments is already locked in through legally binding entitlements, limiting how much current leaders can change.

Several of Erie’s largest developments illustrate how much growth it has already committed to.

The Redtail Ranch project, located north of Baseline Road and west of Interstate 25, is one of the clearest examples. The development includes more than 500 homes and spans roughly 300 acres. It moved forward in 2025 after the town settled a lawsuit with the developer, despite earlier attempts by the council to block it.

As part of that process, the developer invested more than $10 million in environmental remediation over several years . Once a project reaches a certain stage, denying it can expose the town to significant financial liability. Town officials indicated that continuing the legal fight could have cost Erie tens of millions of dollars, a risk the town ultimately chose to avoid.

Erie Highlands Open space Courtesy of the Town of Erie

Another major project, Spring Hill, is embedded in long-term approvals. Town records show the development includes 632 residential lots across approximately 301.89 acres south of Highway 52 and west of County Road 3.

Additional filings across the town reinforce the scale of already-approved growth. Summerfield includes multiple phases totaling hundreds of homes, including 300 single-family lots and 195 townhome units on more than 295 combined acres.

Parkdale, another development area, includes at least 141.55 acres of planned residential construction.

Together, these projects alone represent well over 1,000 housing units that have already received approval and are progressing through final platting and construction phases.

Town planning records show that large portions of Erie’s remaining developable land are already designated for residential or mixed-use development through planned developments and annexations.

• The Spring Hill project covers more than 300 acres.
• The Redtail Ranch site spans roughly 300 acres.
• The North Station planned development amendment encompasses approximately 597 acres near Weld County roads 7, 10 and 12 and Interstate 25.

In addition, proposed and ongoing annexations continue to expand the town’s development footprint. A 2026 application for the Front Range Landfill area includes annexation of 159 acres and rezoning of a total 630-acre site along Weld County Road 5. These figures point to several square miles of land, much of it already entitled or in active planning stages,being committed to future development.

The financial structure behind these developments further limits the town’s flexibility.

In Redtail Ranch, more than $10 million has already been spent by the developer on cleanup and site preparation.

Development agreements across Erie also typically require developers to provide financial guarantees for infrastructure improvements, such as roads, utilities and drainage systems. A 2016 Vista Ridge development agreement, for example, included formal acceptance of financial guarantees tied to required improvements, a common structure for infrastructure funding.

Vista Ridge neighborhood Photo courtesy of Erie Protectors

Those guarantees are tied to approved plans, meaning that once agreements are executed, both the town and developers have financial stakes in seeing projects move forward.

At the same time, municipal finances are often structured around anticipated growth. Impact fees, property taxes and future retail activity tied to new housing are incorporated into long-term planning assumptions. While exact revenue totals vary by project and phase, the town’s willingness to settle litigation in Redtail Ranch highlights how financial exposure can restrict future decisions.

Even before full buildout, development generates revenue streams for the town.

These include building permit fees, impact fees and property tax revenue as homes are completed and occupied. Infrastructure built by developers—such as roads, water systems and public improvements—is often transferred to the town, reducing the need for direct municipal capital spending. Once a development is completed that was paid for using town bonds, the sales tax from that property is used to pay back the initial investment and for future developments.

However, those revenues are phased over time and are often offset by the cost of providing services to new residents. That dynamic is one reason growth is frequently built into long-term fiscal planning, making it difficult to abruptly halt projects without financial consequences.

The legal framework surrounding these projects is a key factor in why they continue moving forward.

Once development agreements are approved and vested rights are established, municipalities face limits on their ability to impose new restrictions. In the case of Redtail Ranch, approval of the settlement and preliminary plat effectively established the project’s entitlement framework, reducing the town’s ability to add new substantive conditions without reopening litigation.

That pattern applies more broadly across Erie’s development landscape. Projects that have progressed through annexation, zoning and preliminary plat stages are often legally protected, leaving current officials with limited options beyond managing how those developments are implemented.

For many residents, the scale of already-approved development is not immediately visible.

Public debate often centers on whether growth should continue at its current pace. But planning documents show that much of that growth has already been approved in earlier years, under different assumptions about infrastructure, water supply and community priorities.

The result is a disconnect between what residents believe can still be changed and what is already contractually obligated.

Despite those constraints, not all land in Erie is fully vested. The town still has authority over future annexations, zoning decisions on unentitled land and aspects of design and infrastructure timing.

Understanding how much of that growth is already set in motion may be essential to understanding what choices remain for the citizens of Erie.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays ready to lead, no matter who’s in charge.

The post How much of Erie’s growth is already set in stone? appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Erie Town Council considered a major residential development and heard concerns from residents about new event permitting requirements during its April 14 meeting.

Council members held a public hearing on the Spring Hill preliminary plat, a proposed residential development north of Morgan Hill that would bring 632 housing units to roughly 300 acres.

Town staff said the project includes a mix of single-family homes, duplexes and townhomes, along with open space, trails and a future school site.

“The project area is designated […] as low density residential,” said senior planner Harry Brennan, noting the proposal aligns with the town’s comprehensive plan and falls within expected density ranges.

Plans for the development include approximately 35 acres of public open space, additional private open space and trail connections throughout the site.

Planning Diagram Courtesy of the City

The project also requires continued remediation of at least one former oil and gas site before final approvals can be granted.

“The town would not be able to approve a final plat […] until the point where that cleanup is completed,” Brennan said.

The applicant, represented by PCS Group, emphasized that oil and gas operations would be removed from the property as part of the project.

“There will be no more oil and gas operations on this property,” said planner John Preswitch.

Following the hearing, council is expected to consider the proposal as it moves through the approval process.

Earlier in the meeting, council members approved a consent agenda that included a series of routine but wide-ranging municipal actions.

Items approved included intergovernmental agreements, infrastructure-related contracts and updates to town code, along with appointments and administrative approvals tied to ongoing town operations. The consent agenda also covered agreements related to public works and utilities, reflecting continued investment in infrastructure and maintenance as the town grows.

Council additionally adopted proclamations recognizing community initiatives and observances, continuing a pattern of formal recognition for local programs and national awareness efforts.

The approvals were passed unanimously without separate discussion, a common practice for items considered non-controversial or administrative in nature.

During public comment, several residents raised concerns about new permitting requirements affecting community events, particularly the Erie High School senior parade.

Residents said they were recently informed of a 90-day permit requirement and changes to support from town departments, creating uncertainty for an event that has traditionally been organized by volunteers.

“We’re just asking for that to be waived so we can meet the requirements for the new permit,” said Adrienne Hillary, who is helping organize the parade.

Kate Arnold, vice president of the Erie High School Booster Club, said the changes have strained relationships between volunteers and town staff.

Kate Arnold addressing the council.

“The relationship between our town administration and the volunteers […] has become unnecessarily adversarial,” Arnold said.

Arnold added that increased requirements risk discouraging community participation.

“It feels very much like we are effectively being discouraged from building the community ties that keep our youth engaged,” she said.

Jessica Ferman, who is organizing the school’s after-prom event, said communication about the new requirements has been inconsistent.

“If you put these kind of processes in place, you need to advertise it and you need to let us know,” Ferman said.

Other speakers urged the council to waive the 90-day requirement for this year’s parade and provide clearer guidance for future events.

Additional public comment addressed broader concerns, including communication with diverse communities and the importance of multilingual outreach in the face of ICE presence in the community.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays ready to lead, no matter who’s in charge.

The post Erie advances Spring Hill development, hears parade concerns appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

On June 30, Democrats in Colorado will decide who makes the midterm ballot in November. It is another in a string of high-stakes elections in which voters feel their agency diminished. While the process may feel opaque, the state’s unique process offers various ways for candidates and locals to participate.

There are two ways for prospective candidates to reach the democratic primary ballot: assembly and petition. 

Shad Murib

“What I like about Colorado is we give myriad options for candidates,” said Shad Murib, chair of Colorado Democrats, “Colorado increases options to get on the ballot for everybody.” 

Candidates can build a grassroots following during the caucus and assembly process. 

“If you’re someone who is not well known or doesn’t have an established base,” said Carol Burkhart, on her 54th year working at Weld County Democrats, “going through the assembly process is where you develop a name, you pick up volunteers, you pick up donors.” Candidates partaking in assembly must receive more than 30% of the delegate share at each assembly to advance.

Caucuses are the first of three gatherings in the assembly cycle. Any registered democrat can turn up to the precinct caucus in their area. Typically of smaller attendance, delegates are selected based on their views and the candidates they say they will vote for at the assemblies. Delegates advance from precinct caucus to county assembly and then state assembly, where their votes determine which candidates advance to the primary ballot.

In 2022, Colorado Democrats changed the caucus process. Traditionally, Democrats voted in a preference poll at caucus, electing delegates to go on to assembly for key races. Preference polls now occur at county assembly, seemingly stripping the caucus of its utility. 

“It was to make it easier on counties to have fewer items to keep track of throughout the process and kind of winnow down the delegate field,” Murib said. “It’s not necessarily a decision that I supported.” 

The state party chooses the highest-contested race to poll for. In 2026, it was the state Senate race in which Julie Gonzalez received overwhelming support.

Without polling, the work at the caucus seems paltry to some Dems. Calls abound for shedding the caucus altogether, in favor of a leaner system straight to the primary, a structure many states have already adopted. 

Murib, however, values Colorado’s rare setup, “I maintain that our hybrid model is worth defending because it builds strong and resilient campaigns for the general election.” 

Without a caucus, essential democratic work, deciding who will be a delegate, electing judges and precinct organizers, gathering ideas for the party platform, would vanish.

Additionally, some have floated ending the caucus for what they view as an inherently exclusionary structure. It is conducted in person, on the weekend, in March and April. They argue that the system by nature, alienates those working weekends, full-time caregivers, and others unable to travel to be in person.

Petition candidates can acquire verified signatures from their constituents, between 500 and 1500 per congressional district. They then only need 10% of the delegate vote at the assembly to make the ballot. Some speculate that candidates will pivot to petition due to fear of their delegate turnout at the assembly. This is how incumbent senator John Hickenlooper will appear in 2026, after dropping out of the assembly process on March 13. Theoretically, candidates acquire signatures by knocking on doors, but some petitioners hire private firms to do it for them, with costs estimated anywhere from $15-$60 per signature.

This year, many incumbents have relied on the petition method, using their wealth and established support for a method requiring fewer delegate votes to advance. Meanwhile upstart, political outsiders have exercised the assembly process, condemning the establishment’s status quo and weaponizing populist sentiment.

“I always say the best campaigns are the ones who both go through the caucus process and the petition process,” Murib said, “you can build the strongest campaign that’s ready to win when you go through both.”

In counties like Boulder, at the caucus, Democrats choose who will represent them as delegates in the further assemblies. In Weld, everyone who wants to be a delegate gets to go to the county assembly. These policies belie the criticisms that the process is only for political “insiders.” Of people who cry foul that the process is only for elites, Murib said “join us and help us make it better.”

Ansel Barnes, an electrician in Erie, participated in his first caucus this year, continuing to garner votes that sent him all the way to the state assembly, where he fulfilled his promise to those who sent him there: voting for progressives. “I will be going to push out incumbents,” he said, “to put in new people who run clean campaigns.” He described himself as a “populist” and said that his youth (he’s 30) inspired support amongst the typically aging demographic patronizing local politics.

Barnes recalled that at the state assembly on March 28, there were 127 delegates from Boulder County. He said some delegates went in with an uncommitted designation for races, opting to choose on the day from candidate presentations. Delegate fidelity remains an open-ended aspect of the process.

“There’s no guarantee that they’re going to vote for the person they pledged to,” said Andrew Nicla, communications manager at Colorado State Dems.

Barnes was particularly interested in the race for State House District 19 between Anil Pesaramelli and Jillaire McMillan. The race exemplified a perceived fissure in the party. To Barnes, McMillan’s endorsements from establishment Dems raised concern. Pesaramelli, on the other hand, represented “people who are actually doing the work.” At the state assembly, both received above the 30% vote threshold and will be on the ballot in June.

Some counties, like Weld, hosted their first in-person assemblies since 2018. Burkhart said the supply of local Dems hoping to be delegates has never been higher, “it is a happy problem to have when you have more people who want to run as delegates to higher assemblies than you have places for them.” Colorado Democrats used AirTable, a digital voting platform, for the first time, which crashed under the weight of traffic at Weld. The new system overloaded at their March 21st assembly, resulting in the county having to email ballots out, delaying the results until the following Monday.

Like many things of our electoral system, Colorado’s is a process whose structure sometimes obscures the will of its participants. Evidence of its inconvenience confirms to some what they have long suspected, a belief that’s infiltrated much of modern politics: that the system is unfair, that it benefits the ruling class, that the odds are stacked against real people. They cite the weakening of the caucus, cumbersome steps, and feeling like the process is only for those who already have a seat at the table.

Inconvenience, however, does not equate to malice. The mixture of candidates and the party platform is as progressive as it’s ever been. Many candidates have arrived on the ballot from the ground up. A publicly-funded healthcare system being a highlight, the party has leaned into other popular progressive policies like establishing a Department of Economic Justice to redistribute wealth. Colorado Democrats say “justice is the destination,” of their platform.

While the party may be at what Murib described as a “crossroads,” the themes liberals care about remain the same. Equitable taxation, humane immigration policy, and preserving democracy unite Democrats in Colorado. “I don’t think it’s actually that divided,” Murib said, “we all care about the same things.” The party said they doubled total turnout and tripled youth turnout this year. One in four delegates, they said, were under forty. 

The evolution of the Colorado Democratic party mirrors that of the party writ-large, one desperate for new leadership and running out of time in their fight against a surging authoritarian right. A split between career politicians and populist outsiders has furthered an identity crisis some argue the awkward nature of Colorado’s system exacerbates. This same system, however, will have as many progressives on the ballot as in recent memory, and hasn’t cushioned incumbents. Colorado’s structure still values local beginnings, with a clear path for neighborhood democrats, whether they be candidates or delegates, to work their way from caucus all the way up to the primary ballot. 

In today’s corporate world, finding true, honest journalism is getting harder, and that includes local news, too. From corporate takeovers to the nonprofit industry, finding reporters willing to ask the hard questions seems like a thing of the past.

Which is why Yellow Scene remains fiercely independent and never, ever accepts quid pro quo. We are only beholden to our readers, not funders.

The truth is, we really cannot do this without you. If you value our journalism, become a sustaining supporter for $8 a month. Your support keeps honest reporting alive and gets the hard copy delivered to your home.

The post The Primary Filter: Colorado’s Shifting Caucus System appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

On April 6, Weld County Commissioners approved a county code that will define data centers and where they can be developed. The ordinance (2026?01) updates Chapter 23 of Weld County Code by adding language about data centers, and guidelines on where they can be built. While not specific to one data center project, it adds parameters to what future projects can look like. 

The ordinance applies to the entire unincorporated Weld County, and is not specific to one particular site. 

The new code clarifies data centers as, “A building or buildings used to house information technology or telecommunications equipment with which digital information is processed, transferred, and/or stored, with no limitation on peak electrical load.” 

This definition was amended following discussions and public comment during the April 6 Board of Commissioners meeting. 

The code adds that data centers can “include associated ancillary structures, including but not limited to offices, security buildings, cooling water tanks, and backup power systems with a total generation of less than fifty megawatts.”

Commissioners clarified during the board meeting that the 50 watt limitation is just for backup power, and does not limit the total power of the project. 

Several Weld County residents spoke during the public comment to share concerns about the possible impacts of AI data centers. Concerns they pointed out were possible noise pollution, water usage, and electric consumption. Several spoke out and asked the board to pause their decision. 

“Put on the brakes a little bit,” one resident said. 

A Loveland resident highlighted the current drought in Colorado,  as a reason to delay moving forward with the new Code Ordinance. 

“We understand well how precious water is in the world, but especially here in Colorado for our farms and ranchers,” she shared.

Another resident was more blunt in their reservations , “We don’t have the water for these things.”

Weld County Board of Commissioners discuss Code Ordinance 2026-01 with the Department of Planning Services.

A.I. data centers across the country consumed around 17 billion gallons of water in 2023, according to the Association for Cleaning and Facility Solutions. Data centers are projected to be using approximately 68 billion gallons of water by 2028. Globally, they are expected to consume anywhere from 4.2 to 6.6 billion cubic meters of water in 2027, according to a 2023 study published by Cornell University.

David Eisenbraun, the director of Weld County’s Department of Planning and Development Services, told Yellow Scene Magazine that Colorado is familiar with water scarcity as a semi-arid state. Future developments could utilize dry cooling or closed loop systems, which rely on less water than some of the systems currently being used by data centers. 

“However, we did not choose to mandate or specify a particular type of technology because in the data center world, technology is changing so rapidly, that was something we advised them [the board of commissioners] to not try and dictate,” Eisenbraun said.

As of April 7, over 40% of Weld County was in a severe drought, and around 38% was in an extreme drought. Just under 20% of the county was in a moderate drought. 

Despite the worry some people shared, other residents were in support of the ordinance. One Weld County citizen felt it would “level the playing field,” while another stated the county needs to “keep moving forward.” 

Code Ordinance 2026-01 was approved with a 4-1 vote, following around 3 hours of public comment from more than 25 residents. April 6 was the third reading of the ordinance, and each one included public comment. 

Scott James was the “no” vote. 

The Board of Commissioners first read the code in January. Since that time, board members have investigated data centers already in Colorado, and other parts of the country. They identified what worked well and what didn’t, according to the board members. 

In addition to defining data centers, this ordinance also lays out where they can be built. With approval from a Use by Special Review (USR), they can be built in the I-1 (Light Industrial) zone. Centers can also be built in other Industrial Zone districts after being approved by an administrative Site Plan Review. The Use by Special Reviews are required to hold a public hearing in front of the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. 

The approved code ordinance also prohibits data centers being built on agricultural land, requires  “Will Serve” letters for electricity, and implements dBA noise regulations. 

Weld County is not the only place in Colorado where residents are vocal about opposing data center developments. 

Tensions are on the rise in Colorado Springs due to a proposed data center near the Garden of the Gods, KOAA News5 reported. The crowd at a recent public forum was large enough to warrant two meetings, with a third one to be scheduled in the future. The debate got heated at times, according to KOAA, as several in attendance were clear about their opposition to the project. 

There are currently more than 50 data centers across 5 markets in Colorado, according to Data Center Map. The markets are Loveland, Walsenberg, Fort Collins, Denver, and Colorado Springs. Denver is the largest market, with 46 total data centers. 

In February, Denver City Council announced that they would file a moratorium on new data centers. It will last for several months, if approved, but will not stop current projects. The pause will allow city officials to go over guardrails and review regulations regarding new data center developments in the city, according to Mayor Mike Johnston. Projects that were already permitted or are already underway might be expected to follow any new regulations. 

Eisenbraun told Yellow Scene that the Department of Planning Services is not concerned about the environmental impacts of developing data centers in Weld County.

“We have good state agencies who can regulate the air quality permitting side,” Eisenbraun said. “We have a great county environmental health department who’s very good at managing wastewater, septic permits, things like that.”

Eisenbraun hopes that in the future, residents can see the potential benefits of data centers in Weld County.

“With these data centers being large property tax producers and then low infrastructure impacts, minimal impact on roads and traffic and things like that, I do think people are going to see the benefit of these when they’re done in the correct zone districts and properly mitigated,” he said.

A handful of data center projects have expressed interest in Weld County as a development site, according to Eisenbraun. However, no plans have been approved yet. 

In today’s corporate world, finding true, honest journalism is getting harder, and that includes local news, too. From corporate takeovers to the nonprofit industry, finding reporters willing to ask the hard questions seems like a thing of the past.

Which is why Yellow Scene remains fiercely independent and never, ever accepts quid pro quo. We are only beholden to our readers, not funders.

The truth is, we really cannot do this without you. If you value our journalism, become a sustaining supporter for $8 a month. Your support keeps honest reporting alive and gets the hard copy delivered to your home.

The post Weld County Adds Data Centers to County Code During Drought appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Erie officials outlined an ambitious vision for the town’s future last Thursday during a State of the Town presentation,  yet much of the evening left out key details that would determine whether that growth is financially and environmentally sustainable.

Colton Jonjak Plahn and Jillaire McMillan, candidates for state House District 19, attended to hear from residents. Councilmembers Baer, O’Connor, and Pesaramelli were in attendance, as well as Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell. Mayor Andrew Moore delivered a wide-ranging presentation covering development, infrastructure, water supply and economic planning before opening the floor to the audience. 

The audience’s questions, particularly around water supply, mineral rights, and infrastructure funding, quickly became the focus of the discussion, as residents pressed officials on decisions that could shape the town’s long-term trajectory. 

Outside the event, roughly 25 residents gathered beforehand, some holding signs, protesting the lack of transparency surrounding mineral rights, recent land use decisions, and the firing of Town Manager Malcolm Fleming.

The meeting was undergirded with tension as the town faces differing visions on how to continue to develop. 

Erie’s Growth and Home-Rule Governance

Many of the issues discussed at the State of the Town meeting  were driven by Erie’s growth.

Erie’s population has grown rapidly over two decades. The town had roughly 1,200 residents in 1990 and about 8,000 by 2000, before expanding to more than 40,000 today.

Much of Erie’s current growth is tied to development agreements and approvals dating back years or decades, including large-scale projects such as Vista Ridge and Redtail Ranch. These “vested” contracts can legally constrain the town’s decisions on current and future development.

The town is now in its first full year operating under home rule, which expands local authority by allowing towns to create a charter, which is a local constitution. A home rule municipality can pass its own ordinances and determine governmental structure without needing state legislature to determine taxation, land use, and local regulations. Under home rule, council members are elected by district, while the mayor is elected town-wide.

However, home rule does not extend to key constraints shaping Erie’s future. Oil and gas operations remain largely regulated at the state level, while water rights are governed by Colorado law.

During the town hall, Mayor Andrew Moore cited the town’s recent community survey as justification for his approach to affordable housing, saying residents support it only under limited conditions. 

“Affordable housing is important to us — so long as you don’t use Erie taxpayer money to subsidize it,” Moore said, adding that residents are open to projects funded through state or federal sources rather than local revenue. He framed the survey as a key tool guiding his decisions, describing it as evidence that town leadership is acting in alignment with public sentiment.

Former Mayor Justin Brooks disputed Moore’s interpretation.

 “He made it sound like the survey results said that the town of Erie supports affordable housing as long as it doesn’t use taxpayer money. That’s not what the survey said at all,” Brooks said. 

As previously reported and as seen in the survey, residents ranked affordable housing as among the town’s top priority.

Brooks added that this is not the first time that Moore has minimized or misframed what the survey demonstrated about a resident’s priorities.

Brooks noted, “Housing affordability is a top issue.”

Throughout the meeting, Moore’s perspective on growth was clarified as he argued that reaching a “critical mass”  was key to attracting businesses and services.

“In a community, you’re really either growing or you’re dying,” he said.

Some residents questioned whether that approach is sustainable given infrastructure demands and resource limits, particularly water.

Mayor Claims Capital Needs Outpace Funding

One of the clearest claims made during the presentation was financial: that Erie lacks sufficient capital funding to meet projected infrastructure needs.

Mayor Andrew Moore told residents the town “doesn’t have enough money going in to expand our facilities to keep up with the growth” and warned Erie could struggle to “keep the niceties and the services” as it expands.

However, public budget records show a more complex picture. Erie’s adopted 2026 budget totals approximately $393 million, and the town maintains tens of millions in the capital improvement fund with a financial plan projected to remain structurally balanced through 2030.

Former Mayor Justin Brooks said the presentation of Erie’s capital improvement outlook overstated financial strain by omitting key context.  According to Brooks, the town’s capital improvement fund has recently received significant investment, and the chart shown at the town hall did not account for millions in grant funding outside of the capital improvement funds that typically support large infrastructure projects. 

He also said some of the projects included in the projection were not formally adopted capital plans but preliminary or aspirational ideas, which could give residents the impression that the town is facing a larger funding gap than it actually is. 

“I think it was misleading. He showed capital projects that are not officially in the plan. They’re just ideas,” Brooks said. 

The funding challenges Moore presents might stem not from a lack of shovels,  but from trying to dig too big a hole. While incoming revenue has remained consistent, the scale of planned developments has accelerated alongside the booming population. The big question is: Does Erie have the resources to sustain this rapid growth? Capital planning documents outline years of major projects, including water, transportation and public facilities, with hundreds of millions of dollars in costs that extend well beyond a yearly budget and must be funded over time through a combination of reserves, taxes, and development-related financing.

Another pressure stems from how growth is being financed. New development can generate long-term tax revenue but requires significant upfront investment in infrastructure. When developments fall short of covering their own costs, the difference is typically absorbed through public funding. In some cases, that investment reaches tens of millions of dollars — including up to $21.3 million in public support for the Erie Town Center project.

With this in mind, the town must be selective in which developments receive funding. Moore mentioned an idea for a new north–south roadway connection linking County Line Road to Airport Drive. The current road is a narrow residential street, surrounded by development and difficult to expand. 

 “What he’s describing is a $20 million road,” Brooks said, saying that it could cost millions to save only marginal travel time for a subset of drivers. With the risk of the costs falling on the taxpayer, developments receive significant public scrutiny.

Mayor Moore pointed to a gap between infrastructure needs and available funding, particularly for roads, public facilities, and recreation. What remains unresolved is how those costs will ultimately be distributed. Whether through taxes, existing revenue, or funds processed through the Urban Renewal Authority, the financial burden of growth may fall on residents, future development, or both.

Water Scarcity  

Water supply remains one of the most pressing issues facing the town. 

Erie’s primary water source is Lake Granby through the Colorado-Big Thompson system. While it currently meets demand, future supply remains uncertain as Colorado faces long-term drought conditions.

Two major projects intended to expand supply — Chimney Hollow Reservoir and the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) — are part of large-scale regional water projects costing hundreds of millions of dollars, requiring participating municipalities to commit to long-term infrastructure and delivery costs. These costs are typically passed on through utility rates, development fees or other public funding mechanisms.

Residents repeatedly pressed officials on how continued growth aligns with water uncertainty. 

“If there’s a water concern, why are we still building out?” one resident asked. 

Moore responded, “I can say with all honesty, I don’t have a full answer.”

That admission leaves a central issue unresolved: whether sufficient water exists to support the town’s long-term growth plans, which has been a rising concern as Erie, along with the rest of Colorado, implement water restrictions.

Additional audience comments focused on groundwater impacts, private well users, and water use tied to oil and gas operations. 

“I’m not prepared tonight to talk about wells in our town,” Moore stated.

As growth decisions continue, the town’s long-term water availability remains unsure, limiting the public’s ability to assess risk.

Mineral Rights and Transparency 

The most contentious issue of the evening centered on the town’s mineral rights and ongoing negotiations tied to the Draco well site in Weld County. Previous reporting found discussions involving the mayor and outside parties had been underway since December 2025 before being disclosed publicly. These discussions included an offer from Civitas Resources, the same company operating the Draco pad.

While the Draco project itself has already been approved at the state level, Erie retains ownership over certain municipal mineral rights, which give the town leverage over how future oil & gas development proceeds.

While the town may not be able to stop the Draco Pad, Erie is not required to sell the mineral rights it still owns, which would open the door to more drilling in the future.

That leverage is at the center of the current debate within the Town Council. The mayor is exploring whether to sell or lease those rights, a move that could generate revenue but also eliminate the town’s ability to influence future drilling activity.

Residents also raised concerns about the town’s consultant, Matthew Owens of Alameda Mineral Advisors, who was the COO of Civitas Resources until 2023. Alameda Mineral Advisors’ compensation depends on completing a deal. Under the agreement, the firm is responsible for conducting market analysis, running a competitive bidding process, and negotiating deal terms. The contract allows for up to $4.5 million in compensation, including payments tied to the value of any resulting transaction. That creates a financial incentive for Alameda Mineral Advisors to complete a deal regardless of whether it’s in the town’s best interest.

Public safety was another hotly debated topic. Former Erie mayor Justin Brooks, speaking as a resident who lives near the proposed Draco site, challenged the assumption that negotiating with operators would improve safety. 

Drawing on his experience in office, he said the town has limited input once drilling begins, noting that during his tenure “there were multiple […] spills, industrial accidents in town,” and that when they occur “there is very little that the town can do about shutting down the operations.”

Erie Resident: “Then what are you selling?”
Moore had just clarified that he possessed “zero maps” for public disclosure.

Brooks warned that relying on cooperation from operators may not meaningfully reduce risk, calling the idea that the town could gain leverage over safety through a deal “a dangerous line of thinking.” He added that even when issues are identified, “it could be weeks before they fix it… it doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re going to be any safer.”

Oil and gas incidents remain relatively common across major producing regions. A 2024 analysis of state-reported data found at least 2,709 oil and gas spills across Colorado, New Mexico and Wyoming in a single year, totaling roughly 7 million gallons of liquid released into the environment. 

In response, Mayor Moore said, “The reality is it’s about safety, and it’s about compensation. I cannot say anything more than that at this point.”

Former Mayor Justin Brooks strongly disputed that framing after the fact, arguing that selling or leasing additional mineral rights would not increase safety and could instead reduce the town’s control over oil and gas operations.

Brooks pushed back on Moore’s suggestion that negotiations could improve outcomes for residents, arguing that making concessions only benefits the operators. 

“To clear the way for their drilling only helps them. It does not protect us,” he said.

He noted that the town’s regulatory authority is severely limited regardless of any agreement. 

“The highest potential penalty we […] can impose for an industrial accident… is $1,000 a day,” Brooks explained, emphasizing that Erie lacks the power to shut down operations or prevent drilling directly. He concluded that “selling or leasing additional mineral rights will inherently make the town less safe.”

The town is expected to receive approximately $4 million from existing mineral leases once drilling begins, according to Moore, though details about timing and conditions were not fully disclosed.

Residents also expressed misgivings about transparency, particularly after Moore said the town does not have maps showing the extent of its mineral holdings.

“Then what are you selling?” one resident asked.

Residents repeatedly pressed for basic information, including valuation, deal structure, and whether the agreement would involve a lease or outright sale. Mayor Moore remained noncommittal on the details of the valuation and agreement structure

A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for April 21, though residents are concerned that a vote will be called without further input.

St. Scholastica and the Page property

Conversations surrounding the lack of transparency extended beyond mineral rights to the Page property near Coal Creek.

The timeline of how a proposed land swap involving St. Scholastica Catholic Church emerged has drawn scrutiny, particularly after reporting found discussions involving the mayor and outside parties had been underway for months without the knowledge of most of the Town Council. This information was acquired via a Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) request of the mayor’s emails, and Yellow Scene’s reporting of the issue was the first that other councilmembers had heard of a potential deal.

The property was purchased using a combination of open space tax revenue and federal pandemic relief funds through the American Rescue Plan Act, making it a publicly funded asset. Town officials initially indicated that ARPA funds used to purchase part of the site would need to be allocated toward affordable housing. That interpretation later shifted, with the mayor stating the funds could be used more broadly.

One resident, a nurse, questioned whether such a proposal would comply with federal restrictions on ARPA funds, saying she was “aware that ARPA monies […] cannot support religious and or religious-based anything,” and asking how the town could move forward if those funds were involved.

The mayor responded that any agreement would likely involve reimbursement or a land exchange rather than direct use of federal funds, but acknowledged the legal details had not been fully resolved.

A proposal introduced by Moore and state Rep. Dan Woog (whose name elicited booing from the audience) would relocate the church and partner with Catholic Charities to build affordable housing on the site.

Moore defended the process, describing the discussions as preliminary.

“Every idea starts somewhere,” he said, adding that proposals are often explored informally before being shared more broadly.

The situation has also exposed divisions within the Town Council, where several recent decisions related to development and mineral rights have split along a 4-3 vote.

Officials said any final agreement would need to comply with federal rules governing ARPA funds, though details remain unclear.

Elections and Planning Updates

Erie is preparing for municipal elections, with several council seats, including those held by Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell and councilmembers John Mortellaro and Brian O’Connor, up in November.

The town is also revisiting its comprehensive plan and Unified Development Code, which are the two primary documents that determine what can be built, where, and at what density.  Back in October of 2024, Erie greenlit a new “Ellevate Erie” Comprehensive plan after a multi-year process. The plan increased allowable density and laid out a long-term vision for accommodating significant population growth, potentially doubling the number of homes over the coming decades.

Now a year and a half later, the council has already begun reconsidering aspects of those density assumptions and how they align with infrastructure, water supply, and community priorities. At the same time, the Unified Development Code, which governs what developers can    actually build, has not yet been fully aligned with the 2024 plan, creating a gap between policy goals and enforceable regulations.

That combination of a newly adopted plan, ongoing reconsideration of its key elements, and an out-of-sync development code has introduced uncertainty about the town’s long-term strategy and what standards developers will ultimately be held to.

The mayor said the updates aim to align policy with long-term goals.

Looking forward

The meeting left Erie’s most significant decisions unresolved and obfuscated. By moving forward without disclosing vital financial and environmental data, the town is forcing a choice: residents must either accept the plans blindly or demand a more transparent process before the deals are finalized.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth without ever accepting quid pro quo. Your support helps us keep holding truth to power.

The post Erie faces tough questions on water, mineral rights and growth appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Storyshare provided by Jeffrey A. Roberts, Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition

April 9, 2026

By Jeffrey A. Roberts
CFOIC Executive Director

Colorado’s Law Enforcement Integrity Act does not permit agencies to charge fees as a condition of releasing body-worn camera footage depicting possible misconduct by police officers, the Colorado Court of Appeals decided Thursday.

Affirming a 2024 district court ruling, a three-judge appellate panel said the “conspicuous absence of a fee provision in the Integrity Act is telling.”

“After all, the General Assembly knows how to include a fee provision if it intends one because the CCJRA [Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act] plainly allows a criminal justice agency discretion to charge reasonable fees to review and produce criminal justice records.”

The underlying lawsuit concerns the shooting and killing of 51-year-old Jeanette Alatorre by Boulder police in 2023. The city required Yellow Scene Magazine to pay $2,857.50 before it would release bodycam footage of the incident, arguing that the video is still a criminal justice record subject to the CCJRA’s fee provision.

But the disclosure of footage under the Law Enforcement Integrity Act is mandatory when there is a complaint of police misconduct, the appellate judges noted. “The command is clear, plain, and unconditioned on the payment of fees.”

“We’ve set a state precedent,” Yellow Scene publisher Shavonne Blades told the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition. “Municipalities can’t hide behind these fees any more to protect police misconduct. My hope is that there will be a domino effect in other states.”

“Today’s ruling reaffirms what should have been obvious to Boulder when this lawsuit was filed two years ago — police departments can’t use exorbitant fees to hide their officers’ misconduct behind a paywall,” said Matt Simonsen, the magazine’s attorney, in an emailed statement. Simonsen represents Yellow Scene along with attorneys Dan Williams and Ashlyn Hare.

Enacted in 2020 following the police killings of George Floyd in Minneapolis and Elijah McClain in Aurora, the Law Enforcement Integrity Act is separate from the CCJRA, which governs the release of most other criminal justice records.

Under the statute, all unedited video and audio recordings of incidents “in which there is a complaint of peace officer misconduct … through notice to the law enforcement agency involved in the alleged misconduct” must be released to the public no later than 21 days after a request is made. An agency can delay the release of video until 45 days from the date of an allegation of misconduct if the video “would substantially interfere with or jeopardize an active or ongoing investigation.”

The fee provision in the CCJRA doesn’t apply to the Integrity Act, Thursday’s opinion says, because the CCJRA limits the charging of fees to criminal justice records “requested pursuant to” the CCJRA. “Had the General Assembly intended for a fee provision to apply to any request for criminal justice records,” Judge Stephanie Dunn wrote for court, “it would not have amended the CCJRA in 2008 to expressly limit the fee provision to requests made under ‘this part 3’ in the statutes.”

“Because ‘this part 3’ refers only to the CCJRA, the fee provision on its face restricts its application to those requests for criminal justice records made under the CCJRA.”

The appeals court also rejected Boulder’s argument that that not allowing fees for footage under the Integrity Act would go against a 1991 law that makes state mandates optional unless the state reimburses local governments for their costs.

“[W]e don’t agree with Boulder that the unfunded mandate statute trumps the Integrity Act, rendering the mandatory obligation to produce requested recordings entirely optional,” Dunn wrote. “The opposite is true. That’s because the assumed lack of funding leaves the two statutes in irreconcilable conflict. This is so because the Integrity Act plainly requires disclosure of requested recordings, while the unfunded mandate statute says that compliance is optional when such a requirement is imposed without an accompanying state appropriation.”

“When faced with such an impasse, the Integrity Act — the more recent and specific of the two statutes — prevails over the older and more general unfunded mandate statute.”

The Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition and the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado had submitted an amicus brief last July asking the Court of Appeals to affirm the district court’s ruling.

Follow the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition on X and Bluesky. Like CFOIC’s Facebook page. Do you appreciate the information and resources provided by CFOIC? Please consider making a tax-deductible donation.

---

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth without ever accepting quid pro quo. Your support helps us keep holding truth to power.

The post Court of Appeals: Colorado law enforcement agencies cannot charge fees for bodycam footage of alleged officer misconduct appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Erie Town Council appointed three new members to the town’s Planning Commission during a special meeting April 7, selecting a slate of candidates that did not include current commissioner Tim Burns.

Council voted to appoint Alex Schatz, Sherri Booth and Paul Leath to fill three open seats following a round of candidate interviews conducted during the meeting.

Burns, who has served on the Planning Commission for four years and reapplied for another term, was among five finalists interviewed but was not selected as part of the final vote.

The appointments came after council reviewed a pool of 11 applicants, later narrowed to six and ultimately five candidates who participated in interviews during the meeting.

Prior to the vote, council members briefly discussed the strength of the applicant pool.

“I think we had some quality candidates that presented here,” councilmember Hoback said, thanking residents for applying and participating in the process.

During his interview, Burns emphasized continuity and ongoing work tied to the town’s comprehensive plan, which was adopted in 2024. He pointed to the commission’s role in shaping long-term growth and said he was interested in continuing efforts to align development regulations with the plan.

“I think that we have done some pretty good work here,” Burns said. “I still think that there’s more to be done.”

Burns also highlighted the need to revisit and refine elements of the comprehensive plan over time, describing it as a “dynamic document” that should evolve alongside the town’s growth.

Other candidates brought a range of professional backgrounds, including planning, engineering, finance and land use law, and spoke about priorities such as infrastructure capacity, affordable housing, and managing future development.

Schatz, a landscape architect and attorney, said he was motivated to apply after becoming more engaged in local land use decisions and emphasized the importance of strengthening the public record in planning cases.

Booth, a retired planner, said she hoped to contribute her experience while becoming more involved in the community, while Leath pointed to continued implementation of the comprehensive plan and alignment with development code updates as key priorities.

The Planning Commission serves as an advisory body to the Town Council on land use and development matters, including reviewing site plans, rezonings and updates to the town’s Unified Development Code.

Following interviews, council members cast paper ballots selecting their top three candidates. The votes were tallied by staff, and the three candidates receiving the most support were appointed without further debate.

The meeting concluded shortly after the appointments were approved.

The post Erie council selects new planning commissioners, incumbent not reappointed appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Three months after Longmont residents packed city council chambers to push back against Flock Security Systems, the city has a new surveillance technology vendor, but many of the same questions remain unanswered.

During Tuesday night’s council meeting, the Longmont Police Department presented Axon as its preferred alternative for automated license plate recognition (ALPR) technology. Public Safety Chief Zach Ardis and his team spoke on Axon’s data encryption processes and superior security protocols as compared to Flock. Assistant Chief Phil Piotrowski highlighted the department’s longstanding relationship with Axon. He noted that the 25-year partnership began when taser technology was first implemented in 2000 and has grown to be a trusted vendor for the department.

Public Safety Chief, Zach Ardis, describing Axon’s data encryption technology.

“They’ve been integral in police operations throughout that time” Piotrowski explained, “They’ve built their product in a way that they understand what we need for security from them.” He added that Axon operations align with Longmont Police Department’s best practices.

Council voted shortly after to move forward with the contract, a decision that landed quickly enough to catch many residents off guard. The pivot followed a December 2025 meeting in which council voted 5-1 to reject any expansion of its contract with Flock, responding to hours of public testimony about privacy violations, data misuse, and concerns about mass surveillance. Since then, DeFlock Longmont, a local movement opposing the city’s use of Flock Safety, has remained active in organizing around surveillance issues in the city.

Though many residents welcomed the departure from Flock, several said the council should have allowed more public comment before approving the new contract. Andrew Palmer, a member of DeFlock Longmont, said he was disappointed that residents had no opportunity to rebut the Axon proposal before the vote was called. He also supports some form of technology oversight, which was discussed in the December meeting, but did not factor into the council’s deliberations that evening. “The police did not present much of a case for why they need this technology,” Palmer said, adding that he would have preferred the council to wait at least one additional session before voting.

Kellen Lesk, a software engineer who also spoke at the December meeting, returned with pointed questions about Axon’s technical architecture. He noted that Axon operates on Azure Government, a cloud environment built for U.S. government compliance, but said the structure of that system still raises concerns for him. “In order to make updates to the system, they need access to the system,” Lesk said. He expressed concern that terms like “encrypted data” and “access” can become slippery in practice, and that important questions about metadata and system configuration were never put to the company during the presentation. He explained that he had hoped council members would press harder on those specifics before voting.

A recurring theme in public comment was the need for a formal city framework to evaluate AI-powered tools before they are adopted. Emily Astranova took issue with Axon Draft One, an AI tool that generates police report narratives from body camera audio, arguing that it removes human judgment from a process that requires it.

Resident Emily Astranova

She also cautioned against treating “AI” as a catch-all term. Large language models, machine vision, facial recognition, and optical character recognition are distinct technologies with distinct risks, she said, and city policy should reflect that. Another DeFlock member called for an oversight body that puts community interests ahead of vendor relationships.

Those calls may be gaining traction, as Council members Popkin and Marsing both indicated openness to forming a technology oversight or advisory committee to help council navigate AI-related decisions going forward. Marsing was candid in his closing remarks. “I have deep-seated concerns, as I think most of the community does, about the existence of ALPR tech, generally,” he said. He acknowledged residents’ frustration with the pace of the decision and encouraged the community to stay engaged, drawing on the technical expertise that has shown up repeatedly in public comment. “The conversation is not over,” he said.

The post Longmont Swaps ALPR Vendor to Axon Amid AI Oversight Calls appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Mayor Andrew Moore will host a State of the Town event on Thursday, April 2, from 6–8 p.m. at Town Hall, 645 Holbrook Street. The event will include a presentation from the mayor and town leadership on current projects and policy issues, followed by a question-and-answer session with residents. Participation will be available both in person and via livestream.

According to a post published on the mayor’s Facebook page, the event will begin with a 30–45 minute presentation before moving into a moderated question-and-answer session. Questions submitted in advance are expected to be addressed first, with additional questions taken from attendees if time allows.

Moore said the presentation will cover a range of topics, including recent population growth, new business openings, the town’s transition to voting districts, and the search for Erie’s next town manager.

The mayor also said the event will include updates on infrastructure projects such as the Erie Bee on-demand transit program, expansion of police facilities, and preliminary work connecting County Line Road to Airport Drive. Other topics expected to be discussed include the Draco oil and gas project, water supply challenges, development of the Page Property, and future capital improvement planning.

Residents are encouraged to submit questions ahead of the event by emailing amoore@erieco.gov. Questions will also be taken during the meeting, time permitting.

The livestream link and additional details about the meeting are posted at www.erieco.gov/StateoftheTown. 

A gathering of concerned citizens is meeting at 5 p.m. at Town Hall to discuss their concerns about the direction the town is moving.

Among the issues cited by residents since Mayor Andrew Moore took office are:

• Several major decisions have been approved on 4–3 council votes, with Mayor Andrew Moore joined by Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell and councilmembers Brian O’Connor and John Mortellaro forming the majority voting bloc.
• The removal of Pride and Juneteenth flags from town facilities after the council majority voted to limit flags flown on town property to the U.S. flag.
• Approval of a $70,000 community survey contract, an amount residents say was roughly double the typical cost of similar municipal surveys.
• Revisions to the town’s Comprehensive Plan that removed provisions allowing developers to more easily incorporate mixed-use housing.
• The termination of the Town Administrator, which became public after three councilmembers declined to enter executive session, requiring the discussion to occur in open session.
• Communications between the mayor and St. Scholastica Church regarding a potential land swap involving property previously identified for affordable housing. The discussions came to light through public records requests, and some councilmembers have said they were unaware of the talks at the time they occurred.
• Negotiations related to the potential sale of the town’s mineral rights, which residents say have largely taken place in executive session without public discussion. The town has also hired a consultant who previously served as COO of Civitas Resources to facilitate negotiations, with a reported contract valued at $4.5 million.
• Approval of the Redtail Ranch settlement and preliminary plat, allowing residential development to move forward on land that includes a restricted environmental area and active oil and gas wells within and adjacent to the project site.

The post Erie State of the Town Scheduled for April 2 as Residents Plan Gathering appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

On March 24, Erie Town Council advanced drought planning and cut fire sprinkler mandates, amid heated public debate over immigration and mineral rights transparency.

Public comment dominated the meeting, with roughly six speakers raising concerns about immigration enforcement and a similar number addressing the town’s handling of a potential mineral rights sale.

Multiple residents described a growing climate of fear among local families, particularly  children. Erie resident Anna Clark told the council that her daughter had wept at the thought of ICE taking her classmates. ”

Clark urged the council and local leaders to respond, calling the fear “real” .

Other speakers echoed  her concerns and called for more visible leadership. Shannon Milikin said recent outreach from council members was a step in the right direction but emphasized the need for clearer public action., 

“Families of color in your community are living with real fear because of ICE activity,” She pointed out.

Several speakers  identified a nearby federal immigration facility in Frederick as an area of interest. The Frederick site is part of a network of short-term federal holding facilities that have drawn scrutiny over conditions and transparency, according to reporting from KUNC.

Laurel O criticized the facility’s detentions.

Laurel O speaking about ICE.

“Less than 10 miles from where you are sitting now, a man was held in the Frederick, Colorado ICE ERO location for 34 days. The youngest person detained at the Frederick Ice ERO location was 6 years old […] These spaces are designed to be temporary, short-term. They frequently lack beds and access to showers.”

Residents repeatedly asked council to issue a formal statement acknowledging the impact of ICE on the community and to take a more proactive approach to community safety.

A second major theme of public comment focused on the town’s consideration of a potential municipal mineral rights sale.

Residents said they have been unable to access key information about the proposal, including its scope, intent and potential impacts. One speaker said “there have been no dedicated meetings to this topic” and questioned why information has not been made publicly available.

Others criticized the prevalence of executive sessions, arguing that  they limit transparency. Speakers called for public hearings, impact studies to evaluate which properties would be affected and what the sale would mean for property values, environmental damage, and public health, and a commitment not to move forward with any agreement before broader community engagement.

Tonia Sharp, an Erie resident, said “The Draco Pad, as I understand it now, is an unprecedented project. A lot of what they’re doing in the drilling has not been done in Colorado before. Five miles of drilling, and everything else. I would hate for our mineral rights to give them an even bigger reason to expand it.”

Several residents also questioned potential environmental and financial impacts, including effects on home values, public health and future development.

Resident Tonia Sharp, speaking about mineral rights.

The debate follows ongoing reporting on the town’s mineral rights discussions, including concerns about transparency and potential conflicts tied to negotiations with oil and gas operators.

Later in the session, the Council  received a drought and water supply update under Resolution 2026-2022.

Town staff outlined pressure on Erie’s water system following an unusually dry winter and historically low snowpack along the Front Range. Officials reported limited seasonal reserves and an early spike in demand driven by warm weather and irrigation use, conditions that have strained system capacity earlier than typical.

The town is encouraging residents to begin conserving water early, including adopting a voluntary two-day-per-week watering schedule, and warned that additional restrictions could be put in place if conditions worsen. The discussion follows earlier reporting that Erie implemented some of the region’s earliest irrigation limitations amid drought conditions.

Council also approved changes to the town’s building code removing a requirement for fire sprinklers in new residential construction (Item 2026-185).

The decision came despite opposition from fire officials, who raised concerns about increased safety risks. The discussion reflected broader tensions between development costs and public safety standards as Erie continues to grow.

Earlier in the evening, the Erie Urban Renewal Authority approved Resolution 26-007, a supplemental budget request to carry forward funding for several incomplete 2025 projects, including the Colliers Hill pedestrian bridge, pedestrian safety improvements and historic Old Town upgrades. Officials said the request does not include any budget increases and that some projects may come in under budget.

During the council meeting, members also approved Resolution 2026-214, recognizing Dave Sullivan of the Erie High School Education Foundation as the town’s Outstanding Resident of the Year, and a proclamation designating April as a month honoring Olympian Jaccob Slavin for his achievements as a part of the 2026 U.S. Men’s Hockey Team.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Erie Council Tackles ICE, Drought, and Sprinklers appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Employees at Boulder Public Library announced their plans to form a union in September and months later, they are nearing a resolution. The process has been slow, but staff members are hopeful the outcome will restore their collective bargaining rights, and strengthen their voice. If the Boulder Library District grants bargaining rights, it will be voluntarily recognizing the library’s union.  

The campaign to form a union with AFSCME Colorado was announced by library workers in September 2025. Since then, the employees have organized and collected signatures in preparation for the administration’s decision. 

In February, the Boulder Public Library District Board of Trustees tabled a vote on the collective bargaining policy, moving the decision to March 10.

Doug Hamilton, a member of the Boulder Public Library District Board of Trustees, spoke to Yellow Scene Magazine ahead of the March 10 board meeting. He did not expect a final vote would be made, especially if the draft policy was amended in any way. 

“They just wanted a union, is what they tell us,” Hamilton said. “They have publicly stated it’s not an issue of pay or benefits, although I’m sure that’s part of it. They said in today’s environment, they want the protection of a union to feel like safer employees.” 

He did not see any potential downsides to library workers being unionized. He also notes that he views union’s formation as not motivated by intense grievances or poor working conditions.

“The library board has attempted to, and always, tried to make the library an employer of choice. That’s been our goal since the district was formed,” Hamilton said. “I believe our library staff is some of the highest paid, and has some of the best benefits, of all library workers in the state. We have a genuine respect and admiration for the library staff. We are just trying to maintain a great relationship with them and with their union representative.”

Hamilton added that the board also wants to act in the best interest of the library district. He is hopeful that moving forward, library workers and board members will continue working together with mutual respect. 

The shift to a library district model fundamentally altered the professional landscape for Boulder’s library staff. Previously, as city employees, workers held collective bargaining rights; however, the separation transitioned them to at-will status. For many, like custodian Michael Serrano, unionizing is about reclaiming that lost leverage.

What that reclaiming that leverage would look likes is a different for every worker.

For Serrano having a union is important “restores our voice and a seat at the table” regarding decisions that directly impact the essential services provided to the community.

AFSCME notes that many employees want the job security that a union will provide.

And for employees like volunteer program coordinator Christine Burke, the move is an effort to “democratize” the workplace. Burke has emphasized that protecting the library’s future requires protecting its workers first. This sentiment is echoed in the union’s primary objectives, which focus on increasing worker retention, fostering better communication with administration, and maintaining a legacy of inclusion as the District grows.

To guide future discussions, the Boulder Public Library District has drafted a Collective Bargaining Policy built on five core principles: Good Faith, Mission Alignment, Continuity of Service, Fiscal Sustainability, and Equity & Inclusion. This framework aims to ensure that services remain uninterrupted and negotiations remain unbiased.

Under the current draft, the district will negotiate on:

• Wages and salaries

• Working conditions and benefits

• Evaluation and grievance procedures

However, certain operational elements, such as budget adoption, hours of operation, and organizational structure, will remain outside the scope of bargaining. To ensure the policy remains relevant, it will undergo a formal review every three years.

The energy for unionization was palpable at the March 10 board meeting, where staff and community members, many sporting AFSCME shirts, urged the board to refine the current policy. Key suggestions included expanding the union to include IT and finance departments and establishing a formal process for resolving negotiation deadlocks.

While a final vote was not held in March, the board is currently revising the draft to include potential amendments. Both board members and staff agreed that a special session was unnecessary, opting instead to hold the decisive vote on the collective bargaining policy during the April 21 meeting.

The post Boulder Library Workers Want to Unionize appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Erie Town Council approved supplemental budget appropriations, heard resident concerns about the potential sale of municipal mineral rights, and adopted several proclamations during its regular meeting.

Council members unanimously approved a resolution authorizing supplemental appropriations for the 2026 budget year. The adjustments primarily allow departments to roll over unspent funds from 2025 to continue ongoing projects and multi-year initiatives.

Finance Director Sarah Hancock and Budget and Fiscal Manager Cassie Bethune presented the update, noting that most of the requests involve projects already approved in the prior year. Departments requested funds for infrastructure, water and wastewater improvements, transportation projects and capital maintenance. Among the largest rollovers are utility and public works projects, including water transmission infrastructure, Erie Lake dam repairs, the Schofield Farm project and roundabout construction. Other items include streetlight acquisition and conversion to LED systems, trail construction and solar installation at the North Water Reclamation Facility. Town officials said the rollover process is typical early in the year, though the town split the requests into separate categories this year to distinguish routine project rollovers from budget increases caused by unforeseen circumstances.

Updated projections also showed Erie’s general fund beginning balance increased by roughly $10 million compared with earlier estimates, though finance staff cautioned that year-end accounting is still in progress and final numbers will be confirmed later this spring.

During discussion, Mayor Andrew Moore said the town’s long-term capital improvement plan could include expanding the Erie Community Center or building a second recreation center.

“Our capital improvement is showing that we don’t have the funds to do all the things we’ll need to do five years down the road, include things like expansion of the rec center or a second rec center or the Leon A. Wurl Public Service Center,” Moore said, noting the town may survey residents about potential support for a sales tax to fund recreation facilities.

The council opened and closed the required public hearing on the supplemental appropriations without public comment before approving the resolution unanimously.

Several residents used the meeting’s public comment period to raise concerns about the town’s potential sale or lease of municipal mineral rights, an issue that has drawn increasing attention in recent weeks.

Steve Drew, a Colliers Hill resident with experience in the energy industry, urged the council to slow the process and examine the broader financial implications for homeowners before moving forward.

Steve Drew, a Colliers Hill resident, urges the Erie Town Council to consider a slower, more transparent approach to the sale of the town’s mineral rights.

“I think the key here is that’s going to have a negative impact, anybody that lives in Erie that owns a house,” Drew said, adding that potential oil and gas development tied to those rights could negatively impact property values.

He recommended the town hold a public meeting to review the proposal and evaluate the potential financial and environmental impacts on the community.

Amy Becker, an Erie Commons resident attending her first council meeting, also called for greater transparency in the mineral rights discussion and expressed concerns about decisions being discussed in executive session.

“I would ask that we have meetings where we are all able to express our concerns,” Becker said.

“I’m very concerned that decisions regarding the selling of Erie’s minerals have been made in executive sessions and not in public sessions, and that’s a problem,” she added.

Becker said she intends to remain engaged in local government decisions and encouraged the council to allow more public discussion before considering any agreement related to the mineral rights.

Another resident, Kaycee Headrick, asked how the appraisal process for the mineral rights is progressing and whether retaining those rights could affect the proposed Draco oil and gas development project.

Kaycee Headrick discusses concerns about the consequences of selling the town’s mineral rights, particularly pertaining to the health issues caused by drilling.

“There’s conversations about leaving Erie because we don’t want to be part of this potential health or environmental risk,” Headrick said.

Hedrick said some residents fear potential health or environmental risks and are seeking clarity on how council decisions could influence drilling activity.

Moore responded that if the council decides to move forward with any action regarding the mineral rights, the matter would require a public hearing before a final decision is made.

In other business, the council approved two proclamations recognizing community initiatives and observances.

Council members proclaimed March 2026 as “March for Meals Month” in recognition of Coal Creek Meals on Wheels, which has served the region since 1972. According to the organization, more than 77,000 meals were delivered across its service area in 2025, including more than 8,700 meals to Erie residents. The program provides meals to seniors, people with disabilities and others experiencing food insecurity, and also offers additional services such as post-hospital meal delivery and expanded food access for children during school breaks.

The council also proclaimed March as Women’s History Month, recognizing the contributions of women to civic life, business, education and community leadership.

Following regular business, council members discussed the process for filling three open seats on the Erie Planning Commission. Eleven residents applied, and council members selected six finalists who will be interviewed at a special meeting April 7.

During council reports, Council members Emily Baer and Dan Hoback said the town should consider holding a public town hall or listening session to allow residents to discuss the town’s mineral rights before any decision is made.

“I think it’s not wrong for us to hold a public listening session or some kind of town hall meeting where folks can come and learn more about that,” Baer said.

Council members also highlighted upcoming community events, including an April blood drive at the Erie Community Center and an upcoming town recognition of Olympic gold medalist Jacob Slavin, an Erie native and member of the U.S. men’s hockey team.

The meeting concluded with the council entering executive session to discuss water supply strategy and negotiations related to town property matters.

The post Erie approves budget, hears concerns over mineral rights appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Bike safety and public murals dominated Superior’s February 9 town meeting.

Public Works and Utilities Director Brannon Richards briefed Town Council on bike and pedestrian safety along 88th Street, the main access route to Monarch K-8 and Monarch High School for residents of Rock Creek and parts of downtown Superior. The corridor becomes heavily congested at the start and end of the school day, and cars illegally occupying bike lanes have resulted in injuries to cyclists and pedestrians.

A map of 88th Street. Promenade Drive is on the south side, and its terminus at Dillon Road is on the north side. Monarch K-8 and Monarch High are on the east side, near the center.

Richards presented video footage showing students riding on sidewalks and against traffic. “[Students] don’t want to cross 88th Street by the school,” he said. “They have to wait for the signal […]. There’s no sidewalk on 88th Street on the Louisville side.”

Staff recommendations included extending the 20 MPH school zone into Superior and adding a protected, two-lane bike lane on the east side. Richards noted the flex posts protecting the lane would not interfere with snow plowing. He closed his presentation with a blunt assessment: “[The] current situation is the most dangerous: if we do nothing.”

Mayor Mark Lacis praised the video evidence. “You can drive 88th Street every day, but if you’re not capturing it at […] school drop-off time, you’re going to miss the heart of the problem.” He added that the Council was “on board with staff’s recommendations.”

The meeting’s second major item drew sharper debate. Council considered a resolution to partner with Boulder nonprofit Streetwise Arts on a mural festival planned for October. Proposed locations included the amphitheater, concrete benches along Main Street, the Marshall Road underpass, public restrooms, and a dumpster enclosure, with a total budget of $74,000, including $10,000 drawn from the Art & History department.

Mayor Pro-Tem Jason Serbu didn’t hide his skepticism. “This whole thing was supposed to be big murals. I get the underpass, I get the breezeway, but… park benches? A garbage thing? And, forgive my language, but… a shitter?”

Liza McKenzie, vice-chair of the Cultural Arts and Public Spaces Advisory Committee, pushed back. “Those little pieces of art here and there, […] they’re integrated into places we want people to be. A public bathroom? I know it sounds silly, but people use them. That’s where the community is.”

Council members Jenn Kaaoush and Stephanie Miller backed the proposal. “I love the benches,” said Miller. “I’m okay moving funds into this, knowing it creates more of a sense of place.”

Art & History Supervisor Jennifer Garner acknowledged the budget impact plainly: “It’s workable, but it will absolutely take away from museum programming, public art maintenance, and other smaller programs.”

Mayor Lacis offered a closing argument in favor. “The one thing I’ve never heard from any resident, ever, is ‘You guys are spending too much on art.'”

The Council voted 5-2 to approve the resolution. Council member Foster and Mayor Pro-Tem Serbu voted against.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Superior Town Council Tackles Bike Safety and Public Art appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Editor’s Note: In the interest of public transparency and community dialogue, Yellow Scene Magazine is publishing this response to address recent criticisms of our investigative reporting. We remain committed to the facts as documented in the public record.

We appreciate the response from Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell regarding our recent investigative article. However, his response was also unfortunately inaccurate regarding the nature of our reporting. It is necessary to address his criticisms with the clarity that the public record demands.

Firstly, to address the claim that this reporting is an attack on faith: at no point does the article claim that either council member is a parishioner of St. Scholastica. In fact, the only claim made regarding Mr. Bell is that he was included in email chains and involved in specific discussions. Mr. Bell actually confirms this in his own response as he recounts conversations he had with staff, the church, and Mayor Moore. Furthermore, we have explicitly reported twice that there is no evidence Mayor Moore attends this church. His personal religious background is irrelevant to our reporting. Our work is driven by his own words, both in council meetings and in emails obtained through the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA). To frame this as a question of faith, rather than a matter of bureaucratic transparency, appears to be an attempt to politicize a standard investigative process.

Secondly, Mr. Bell asserts that he was accused of “backdoor dealings.” No such language appears in our article. Our reporting described the planning as being “privately underway” or “quietly pursued.” These descriptions are based on the following established facts:

“The CORA records reveal that a planning process involving St. Scholastica, Catholic Charities, a project management firm, the Mayor, and other Erie figures had been privately underway for at least five months before Moore raised it at the November council meeting. Aside from Pro Tem Brandon Bell, no other council members were included in the conversations Yellow Scene Magazine obtained.”

Our central point is that this planning process occurred for months without the knowledge of the broader Town Council or project managers. Mr. Bell does not attempt to refute this. In fact, he extends the timeline of these discussions by stating he participated in early talks about this plan as far back as “2022 or 2023”. Our statement that the majority of the council was left out of the loop was substantiated by two of Mr. Bell’s own colleagues on the council.

Thirdly, Mr. Bell criticizes our reporting for misrepresenting the consultants involved, stating, “These consultants were parishioners volunteering their time—not individuals hired by the Town.”

At no point did our article claim they were hired by the town. We stated they were involved in the planning and discussions, and we quoted their emails directly. Whether they are volunteers or people of faith is irrelevant to the fact that they were participating in government-level planning. Mr. Bell seems to be attempting to turn a systemic critique into a personal one.

In his response, Mr. Bell also admits to his misgivings about the further subsidization of affordable housing.

“[…] providing additional subsidies for affordable housing could lead to similar outcomes: vacant units that remain too expensive for those who need them and insufficient demand among those who can afford them.”

While this may be a valid policy position, it adds weight to our reporting regarding his and Mayor Moore’s potential opposition to using funds specifically intended for affordable housing for their original purpose. While Mr. Bell describes the legal room for ARPA funds to be used otherwise, that is a separate matter from the original intention of the funding or the needs expressed by the Erie community through last year’s survey.

Finally, I will address the allegation that our article is “purely hearsay.” If by hearsay Mr. Bell means that the article quotes the individuals involved and references their own emails obtained by process of CORA, then we have provided exactly that. Any allegations made regarding the actions of the involved parties are supported by their own words on the public record for any citizen to see.

It is telling that despite Mr. Bell’s framing, he fundamentally agrees with our primary claims. He, Mayor Moore, the church, and others began considering a project to relocate the church for several months and did not communicate these plans with the full council. In November, Mayor Moore framed the project as a new thought he was ‘tossing around,’ despite having discussed it extensively for months.

Yellow Scene Magazine holds a deep respect for all religious individuals and backgrounds. This is not a matter of partisan division, but a matter of transparency. Our article aims to start a dialogue about processes from which the community and other council members were excluded. Before publication of our article, we reached out to Mayor Moore and the church for comment and they declined to respond. We would still welcome their voices. We hold our reporting to the highest standards, and every claim we have made is backed by evidence.

Thank you, Mr. Bell, for continuing the conversation our reporting has started.

The post Facts are Not Partisan: A Response to Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Erie is currently committed to increasing its affordable housing stock to 12% by 2035, and no project looms larger in that effort than the Village at Coal Creek, a 46-acre property near Old Town that the town purchased in 2023 for $6.9 million. The money came from federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) dollars and the town’s TNACC, Trails, Natural Areas and Community Character fund, and the land was initially promoted as a future mixed-income neighborhood with trails, parks, and workforce-level housing. In practice, the project has been mired in uncertainty and bureaucratic delay that has been driven in part by Mayor Andrew Moore, who has repeatedly urged the council to slow down on decisions about the property’s future. Last April, Moore questioned whether the land would be better served as a park. By November, he was floating something else entirely.

At the November 17th Town Council meeting, Moore proposed that the Coal Creek land be used to relocate St. Scholastica, an Erie Catholic Church currently located on Highway 52. 

“Does it make more sense to put a place of worship, possibly St. Scholastica, on this property?” he asked, before adding that Catholic Charities might be a resource for incorporating affordable housing into such a plan. “[…] that’s really as far as the thought got.”

Council members Anil Peseramelli and Dan Hoback were both caught off guard. Hoback told Yellow Scene the proposition was “sprung on the council” without warning. Peseramelli said, “I would have expected to hear this before. We did study sessions on [Coal Creek Property] and it never came up in those sessions.”

But emails obtained through the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) tell a different story. The idea had gone considerably further than Moore’s “thought” framing suggested.

The CORA records reveal that a planning process involving St. Scholastica, Catholic Charities, a project management firm, the Mayor, and other Erie figures had been privately underway for at least five months before Moore raised it at the November council meeting. Aside from Pro Tem Brandon Bell, no other council members were included in the conversations Yellow Scene Magazine obtained.

One notable email is dated June 20th and was sent by Don Fitzmartin, President and CEO of Fitzmartin Consulting. Its language references prior meetings, suggesting the process was already in motion. Fitzmartin laid out two tracks: continuing development on a 10-acre parcel St. Scholastica had purchased near Highway 52 in 2020, or pursuing a land swap that would give the church a foothold at Coal Creek instead. The email also floated a “first right of refusal” on the balance of the Coal Creek property meaning the church could claim additional portions ahead of any other use, including affordable housing. That provision doesn’t reappear in later emails, but the land swap remains central to two more emails and a meeting agenda in the CORA records.

A June 27th meeting agenda for a gathering between “St. Scholastica, the Town of Erie, & Catholic Charities” makes clear how much the church had riding on Coal Creek. The agenda outlines what the church hoped to build at Coal Creek: a new church for 800 to 1,000 parishioners, a parish hall and administrative offices, and a possible future grade school. The scale of St. Scholastica’s Coal Creek ambitions represents a striking departure from where the church’s priorities appeared to be just four years ago. In a January 2021 newsletter, Development Committee Chair Mike Crader wrote that the Highway 52 property the church had just purchased would “provide for the community for the next 100 to 150 years”. By 2024, that property appears in the CORA records only as a bargaining chip in a land swap. What St. Scholastica now intends to do with Highway 52 is unclear, and the church did not respond to Yellow Scene’s Magazine’s request for comment about the shift.

Moore’s portion of the June 27th agenda focuses entirely on the land swap. It references the town-wide survey planned for July 2025, noting that if results showed public support for affordable housing, the Coal Creek property “becomes a place for real conversation and a partnership”, and frames Dig Studio’s ongoing land-use analysis as relevant due diligence for the St. Scholastica plan. That analysis eventually produced five options for Coal Creek, varying the balance between housing and open space. None includes a church. Aly Burkhalter, the Villages at Coal Creek project manager and Dig Studio Senior Planner, does not appear anywhere in the five months of emails.

The July survey did show affordable housing and open space as top priorities for Erie residents — neither of which a church development cleanly satisfies. The fact that Mayor Moore may have been privately advancing an alternative plan while that survey was being conducted and processed strikes some council members as potentially problematic.

 “One, it’s about respecting people’s opinions,” council member Peseramelli told Yellow Scene. “Two, it’s about transparency, because it is taxpayers’ money [going toward the project].”

Moore’s own emails are telling. On June 22nd, he wrote: “The town likely won’t swap land. However, the Paige property is already paid for with ARPA (federal) and Open Space funds and is designated for affordable housing […] My hope is that we can find a partnership where the town provides land for Catholic Charities to build the affordable housing, helping meet our goals while also creating a new opportunity for a new church site.”

Moore had publicly opposed affordable housing at Coal Creek, so his willingness to quietly carve out an exception for a church did not go unnoticed by colleagues. 

“[The potential of the St. Scholastica project including 150 affordable housing units] has been held out as a carrot to the council,” Hoback said. “Erie committed to become 12% affordable housing, and we are currently at 1%. The 150 units in the St. Scholastica plan would be a drop in the bucket.”

What’s Next

The plan now faces a significant obstacle. The Open Space and Trails Advisory Board reviewed St. Scholastica’s pre-application on February 9th and sent a letter to the Council recommending denial. OSTAB’s reasoning was direct:

 “The St. Scholastica development would destroy the attributes of the property for which it was purchased to preserve. The plan does not accommodate open space, natural areas, irrigated agriculture, a healthy riparian area, wildlife and bird habitat, floodplain buffering, viewshed protection, or a tranquil outdoor experience.”

Hoback noted that even when the town first purchased the Coal Creek property, there were concerns about its suitability. 

“The buildable portions didn’t lend an ideal splitting of affordable housing and open space,” he said. 

At a November 19th study session, the Council discussed whether the ARPA funding could be refunded or reallocated if affordable housing was not included in the final Coal Creek plan. Notably absent from that discussion was any mention of what would happen to  TNACC’s contribution if the land were designated solely for affordable housing.

For Paranelli, none of the procedural maneuvering changes what’s at stake.

 “I see it through the lens of how hard it is to be in a home, build equity, and build a family around it. It’s so easy to become homeless in Colorado. Two-to-three months without salary,” he said. 

He continued reflecting on his own background: “I grew up in a one-room home in India and the roof was leaky every monsoon season. There was no yard for my brother and I to play. These affordable houses are a perfect place for families starting. Two bedrooms and a small yard. And when those families are ready for the next step, other families starting out have somewhere to live.”

Whether the Council ultimately approves or rejects the St. Scholastica application, the CORA emails have already altered the political landscape around Coal Creek. The Mayor’s office alongside a church and a consulting firm, carried out at least five months of planning without the knowledge of most of the Council and the project’s manager. For a piece of land purchased with public funds to address one of Erie’s most pressing needs, the process raises questions that won’t be settled by any single vote.

The post Emails Reveal Erie Mayor Quietly Pursued Deal With Church appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Ranked choice voting (RCV) dominated last Tuesday night’s Longmont City Council meeting, drawing an outpouring of public support and setting the stage for a potential ballot measure that could reshape how the city conducts its elections. Several residents touting “RCV 4 Longmont” signs shuffled in just as the Study Session began.

RCV is a type of voting system in which voters have the option to rank candidates in order of preference (first choice, second choice, third choice, etc.). If a candidate receives more than 50% of the first choice votes, that candidate wins. If votes are spread out more evenly between three or more candidates, and no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated. For voters who selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice, their votes would be transferred to their second choice candidate. This process is repeated until a candidate receives more than 50% of the vote.

Former mayoral candidate Shakeel Dalal set the tone in the council chambers that evening, describing how the current voting system requires residents to “become game theorists,” adding “Anyone who’s ever been pressured to not throw away their vote on a third party candidate or told that they must vote for the lesser of two evils to avoid a spoiler has been a victim of this game.”

Dalal was not alone, as twenty residents stepped up to the public comment microphone on the topic, with seventeen speaking in favor of some form of ranked choice voting. Three speakers voiced concerns or opposition to the proposed change.

Residents found creative ways to express their support for RCV, with  arguments in favor of the system ranging from fairness criteria in discrete mathematics to The Dark Knight getting snubbed at the Oscars. Many speakers expressed the desire to see their elected officials working together more and felt that moving toward RCV would be a positive step in that direction.

One resident tied their frustrations with the federal government back to Longmont, arguing “Anything short of RCV in our election is anti-democracy, anti-science and antihuman.”

Local middle school teacher Thomas Baker shared about his familiarity with RCV in school. Baker explained that his students naturally gravitate toward RCV due to it feeling “incredibly fair.” He added that his school uses RCV for a variety of contests, including student government races and science fair presentations. “A bunch of kids like this so it must be a cool idea.”

Local teacher Thomas Baker speaking during the meeting

Following the public comment period, council received an informational presentation from Dawn Quintana, Longmont city clerk, and Stephanie Gnoza, Boulder County elections director. The two officials walked through which RCV methods are currently certified in Colorado, the financial costs associated with switching voting systems, and the voter education requirements that would need to accompany any implementation of the new method.

Mayor Susie Hidalgo-Fahring reminded those in attendance that any change to the city’s voting system would not be a simple administrative decision. Because it would require a revision to the city charter, the question would ultimately need to go before Longmont voters directly in the form of a ballot measure.

What followed was a spirited debate among council members about what a reasonable timeline might look like. Mayor Pro Tem Sean McCoy emphasized the importance of allowing adequate time for a successful voter education campaign before any ballot measure referral.

Despite differing views on pacing, there appeared to be consensus that if community members gathered enough signatures on a petition before the next election cycle, council members indicated they would treat that as a clear signal to place the measure on the 2026 ballot.

The discussion underscored a growing appetite among residents for electoral reform, even as practical questions, including cost, certification and public readiness, remain to be worked through. No formal vote was taken Tuesday night, but the conversation signaled that ranked choice voting is unlikely to fade quietly from the agenda.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Ranked Choice Voting Steals the Show at Longmont City Council appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Some members of Boulder’s Police Oversight Panel are sounding the alarm that structural changes may be quietly eroding the panel’s independence.

At the panel’s November 10 meeting, Police Monitor Sherry Daun announced that the panel would no longer review every internal investigation into complaints of officer misconduct. Going forward, Daun said she would close certain cases without panel input if she and the department’s Professional Standards Unit (PSU) determine that complaints are unfounded or that officers should be exonerated. Daun added that the ordinance grants her “sole authority to classify those complaints” — a claim the panel has contested.

That dispute over authority is part of a broader pattern. In recent months, the city has narrowed the number of cases the panel can review, denied its request to hire independent counsel, and told members they cannot meet privately to discuss these disputes. The panel was created in 2020 specifically to provide independent civilian oversight after an officer drew his weapon on Zayd Atkinson, a Black student picking up trash outside his own home. The cumulative effect of these changes has raised serious concerns about whether the panel retains any meaningful independence at all.

Those concerns are not unfounded. According to data released by the Boulder Police Department and analyzed by Boulder Progressives, disproportionate stops of Hispanic and Black residents have increased despite years of reform efforts: including the creation of the oversight panel itself, the installation of the Office of Police Monitor, and the adoption of a training protocol known as ICAT (Integrating Communications, Assessment and Tactics). Some evidence suggests there is an ongoing trend in use-of-force incidents by the Boulder Police Department. Officers drew firearms on people 240 times in 2024: roughly 20 times per month. Taser use rose from approximately 1.2 incidents per month between 2019 and 2021 to 1.5 per month in 2024.

“The new data from the BPD shows that the police are continuing to move in the wrong direction despite the recent reforms implemented by the Boulder City Council,” said Dan Williams, Executive Committee member of Boulder Progressives. The reforms, in other words, are not working at the same time many worry that the panel charged with holding the department accountable is being systematically weakened.

Since its founding, the panel has faced persistent obstacles. It struggled to keep seats filled due to the sheer volume of cases. In 2022, a founding member resigned in protest after city officials advised her not to speak publicly about a high-profile misconduct case. The dispute was rooted in deep disagreements about transparency and what information panelists were permitted to share with the community.

The tension escalated in 2023, when the city council voted to remove panelist Lisa Sweeney-Miran. Sweeney-Miran was a vocal advocate for police reform and had been involved in a lawsuit seeking to overturn the city’s camping ban that named the police chief. City officials argued that her documented history of activism constituted a bias that could render the panel’s decisions vulnerable to legal challenge and appeal. There was no allegation that she had behaved improperly in her role on the panel, only that her public record made her a liability. Many observers feared this set a dangerous precedent: that any criticism of police, even if expressed outside the panel, in the form of civic participation, could be grounds for disqualification.

That precedent is now being applied more broadly.

The Boulder Police Officers Association (BPOA) recently filed a formal complaint, which was obtained by Yellow Scene through a CORA request, against panelist Maria Soledad-Diaz, who also serves as co-chair of the oversight panel. The complaint accused her of a “clear biased approach” to her role and claimed her statements were “damaging” and “divisive.”

To understand what actually prompted those accusations, it helps to look at the two cases cited in the complaint.

In the first, the panel disagreed with both the department’s internal investigation and the independent police monitor, finding the officers involved in a complaint regarding investigation MI2025-023 may have taken discriminatory actions. Diaz was one of three panelists who reached that conclusion. An external review was subsequently conducted and sided with the department. The complaint characterizes this disagreement as evidence of a compromised process, stating that it raises “serious concerns regarding the integrity of the panel’s review process and suggest a departure from a fact-based approach to police oversight.” But no specific procedural failure is identified. The complaint offers no evidence that the panel mishandled testimony, ignored evidence, or violated protocol. The argument, stripped down, is that reaching a different conclusion than the department is itself proof of bias. That seems to be a standard that would make independent oversight structurally impossible.

In the second case, Ms. Diaz acknowledged that an officer’s actions were within department policy. But nonetheless described the encounter as involving “racial undertones” and a “power imbalance.” The complaint treats this as contradictory behavior. It isn’t. Whether conduct is technically within policy and whether it reflects racial dynamics or imbalanced power are entirely separate questions. Whether Diaz’s assertions were correct is a different question, but they do not appear to be in themselves disqualifying.

The third basis for the complaint involves public statements Diaz made outside of panel proceedings. She told community members she had limited faith in the complaint process and would not encourage people to file complaints. The BPOA characterized this statement as a breach of impartiality. 

A separate complaint was filed by a private citizen, Aaron Brooks, against panelist Mylene Vialard, for “public misconduct and loss of impartiality.” The complaint alleged that Vialard had participated in and led chants at a public protest related to issues the Boulder Police Department manages, that this conduct demonstrated “clear advocacy behavior,” and that it created an “unavoidable appearance of bias.”

What the complaint does not include is any allegation about Vialard’s conduct during panel proceedings. There are no alleged, nor disputed cases, no improper ruling, no procedural violation. The entire complaint rests on the fact that she attended a protest. This raises a serious question about scope: are panelists now subject to removal based on their off-duty exercise of free speech and freedom of assembly? And if so, who decides which protests constitute bias, and against whom?

The Sweeney-Miran case established that prior advocacy against police could disqualify a panelist. That precedent now appears to be extending to the statements of a sitting co-chair and the protest attendance of another member. The effect, intended or not, is to define “impartiality” as the absence of any public skepticism toward law enforcement. Some panelists argue that these moves are producing a system that is structurally biased towards protecting the department from scrutiny.

Communities of color, who are disproportionately subject to use-of-force and disproportionate stops, are statistically more likely to have direct experience with or public opinions about policing. Under the standard being applied, the city may label their lived experience and civic participation as liabilities. Imagine a Black panelist who has attended a community meeting on police brutality, or liked a post in support of Black Lives Matter, or expressed frustration with a complaint process they have personally navigated — each of these experiences could now be framed as evidence of disqualifying bias. 

The communication between the panel, the independent police monitor, and the city attorney’s office has also grown strained.

Diaz told Yellow Scene Magazine, “It has been hard to land in a place of understanding. The panel has been through a couple of changes in the interpretation of the ordinance by the city attorney’s office, and this has impacted its authority and its ability to review cases.”

The disputes have brought panel meetings to a near-standstill and prompted the city to reexamine the panel’s scope. The panel is entering its five-year review, which will determine whether its mandate should be expanded, narrowed, or restructured. Concurrently, the City Manager will launch an independent review of the oversight system to evaluate what is working and identify potential improvements.

Under the new regulations, cases that do not advance to a full administrative investigation are no longer eligible for full panel review, though the panel will continue to receive case summaries, which the city describes as “preserving a level of oversight.” The city has explained these changes as necessary because the system was overwhelmed and the ordinance was always intended to focus the panel on cases where full investigations were already underway, not lower-level complaints.

There is a legitimate argument to be made about workload and efficiency. But the question is whether reducing the panel’s caseload, restricting its ability to hire independent counsel, prohibiting private deliberations, and using complaints to remove members who publicly question the system are all happening in service of a more effective panel — or a more compliant one.

“I think right now, we are in a position where this input is viewed and perceived as a challenge, rather than something that should complement the system,” Diaz said. “The panel is not challenging the system; we want to work and build on the system together.”

With the five-year review underway, there is a real decision point ahead. The city can use it to strengthen the panel, allow it to continue to languish, or dismantle it altogether. All paths have major implications for the evolving relationship between Boulder residents and their police department.

The post Complaints Against Boulder Police Oversight Panel Spark Debate appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Last Tuesday, the Erie Town Council authorized the initiation of a zoning amendment for the Erie Town Center planned development, heard public concerns regarding construction at Vista Ridge detention ponds and approved interim town manager appointments during its Feb. 24 meeting.

During public comment, several Vista Ridge residents expressed frustration over ongoing construction at detention ponds A19 and A20 near the Colorado National Golf Club, citing a lack of communication and transparency. Derek Tuz of Erie said he has sought answers about the ponds since 2014 and described ongoing confusion among the town, metro district and homeowners association regarding maintenance responsibilities. Tuz said recent construction began without residents receiving renderings or detailed information about the final design.

“We have zero answers,” Tuz told council members, noting that more than seven trees have been removed despite earlier notices stating tree removal was not anticipated.

Steve Clark, a new Vista Ridge resident, said the ponds and surrounding landscape were a significant factor in his decision to purchase his home. He described the site as a “mud pit” following tree removal and drainage work and asked the council to share final design renderings with the community. Clark also raised concerns about environmental impacts and potential effects on property values, urging council members to visit the site.

Derek Tuz, an Erie resident, speaks to Erie Town Council on February 24, 2026 about his frustrations with the town’s detention ponds and a lack of accountability.

Former Mayor Justin Brooks said he plans to meet with the Vista Ridge HOA president and will follow up with staff regarding renderings.

Immigration concerns also surfaced during public comment. Shannon Millican, a Thornton resident whose child attends school in Erie, urged the council to publicly acknowledge fears among residents related to immigration enforcement activity in surrounding communities. Millican said while U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has not been active in Erie, reports from nearby cities have created anxiety among some residents. She called on the council to communicate directly with impacted community members.

“When leadership does not acknowledge these fears, it does not create neutrality,” Millican said. “It teaches people that belonging is conditional.”

No formal council action was taken on the matter.

Turning to general business, the council unanimously approved a resolution authorizing staff to initiate a land use application to amend the Erie Town Center planned development, originally adopted in 2020. Planning and Development Director Deborah Craig, who is retiring after 27 years with the town, presented the proposal during her final council meeting. Town officials recognized her tenure and service to the community.

The proposed amendment is intended to provide greater flexibility in the mixed-use development area and address challenges encountered during implementation.

Key changes under consideration include:

1. Allowing live-work units in certain commercial areas.
2. Expanding permitted uses in general urban (GU) zoning districts to include hotels, museums, urgent care facilities and parking structures.
3. Permitting civic buildings and parking garages up to 45 feet in height, consistent with current hotel allowances.
4. Clarifying frontage build-out requirements and excluding driveways and pedestrian accessways from frontage calculations.
5. Establishing parking maximums at 125% of standard requirements.
6. Updating sign regulations to align with the town’s Unified Development Code.
7. Adding a trail connection from the Creekside neighborhood to County Line Road.

Craig emphasized that Tuesday’s action only authorizes initiation of the amendment process. The proposal will still require staff review, referral agency input, a neighborhood meeting, a Planning Commission public hearing and a final public hearing before the Town Council.

Council members discussed balancing commercial tax base goals with added flexibility for residential and mixed-use development. The measure passed unanimously. Staff will incorporate council feedback and return the items for future consideration.

Following the executive session, the council approved two resolutions related to town leadership.

The council formally appointed Melissa Wiley to serve as acting town manager from Feb. 18 through midnight Feb. 24. Members then unanimously appointed Administrative Services Director Meredith Muth to serve as interim town manager effective Feb. 25. Council members thanked Muth for stepping into the role. The meeting adjourned following the appointments.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Erie Approves Town Center Zoning, Debates Detention Pond appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Alice Starek and her husband are farmers and owners of the Golden Hoof farm in Boulder, Colorado. After 15 years in operation, this year will be the first year that they will be able to pay themselves a salary . 

“We’ve never actually been able to pay ourselves for farming […], we get paid in food and a good lifestyle, and things like that,” Starek said.

To understand what affordability really looks like on the ground, Yellow Scene Magazine spoke with dozens of farmers across Boulder County. Their accounts paint a picture of how farmers are adapting, sacrificing, and calling for change as economic and social pressures mount.

In November 2023, the Boulder County Commissioners voted to increase the minimum wage in unincorporated Boulder County. The local minimum wage ordinance took effect in January 2024 and increases in increments every year until it reaches $25 on January 1, 2030. High minimum wage requirements are often a struggle for many farmers, as the profits from their business are not always substantial enough to cover increases in wages.

“That’s a lot of years, of a lot of work without being paid. And, you know, we give our workers food and housing, but we really can’t pay minimum wage on top of that. I’ve known so many farmers in Boulder County that have been really great farmers, and they’ve gone out of business not because they aren’t working hard enough, not because they’re not smart enough, but because they just can’t make a profit, you know,” Starek said.

Michael Moss is the owner of Kilt Farm and the President of Community Farmers Alliance (COFA), a coalition of organic produce growers in Boulder County.

“So as the minimum wage increases, the cost to produce our crops goes up,” Moss said. “Our cost of production keeps going up, but the price we can charge for our food is really set by forces outside of our control.”

This ordinance will only affect farmers in the unincorporated areas of Boulder County. Incorporated Boulder is home-ruled and will not be subject to this ordinance. 

A large portion of the county population resides in incorporated cities and towns, including Boulder, Lafayette, Longmont, Louisville, Erie, Jamestown, Lyons, Nederland, Superior, and Ward. Meanwhile, a smaller portion of the population lives in unincorporated Boulder, where the ordinance is in effect. 

Photo of Michael Moss Courtesy of Kilt Farms

“I appreciate the county’s desire to help close this affordability gap, but putting it on the shoulders of the small business people and a very small amount of the population does not work,” Moss said 

This year, Moss decided to focus his efforts on the Community Farmers Alliance (COFA) initiatives, which aim to help local farmers in Boulder County thrive. 

“I realized that by taking the year off production agriculture, I could work on these issues around minimum wage and affordable housing,” Moss said. 

Farm workers face significant challenges in acquiring affordable housing in the areas where they work. When you look at market-rate housing rentals, the average worker would need to spend 66% – 69% of their income on housing in Boulder County. 

This percentage is more than double the Boulder County affordable housing guideline, which recommends spending no more than 30% of one’s income on housing.

The government has tried to mitigate the situation. In the fall of 1993, a community in Longmont built to support agricultural workers and their families, Casa de la Esperanza, opened its doors. The property is owned and managed by the Boulder County Housing Authority (BCHA), and includes a community and learning center offering free educational and recreational programs for residents. For more than 30 years, the program has helped hundreds of farmworker families find housing, access education, and build community.

“Some of the biggest challenges we have are finding affordable housing for our farm workers and also the challenge in finding farm workers in Boulder County, and then the price we need to pay,” Moss said. 

Lauren Kelso is the site director for Growing Gardens and the Policy Chair for the Flatirons Farmers Coalition, which is a non-profit organization that represents farmers who are centering ecology and regenerative agriculture in their systems.

“The housing that we have available here is not really made for people who are perhaps a migrant workforce and only coming in for short-term work. And the businesses themselves have to make some large-scale changes, […] in order to utilize a migrant workforce.” Kelso said.

Nicholas Little is a volunteer with the Boulder County Farm Jobs Alliance. He explains how a noble desire to do one good in one area can lead to unintentional consequences in another area of life. For example, implementing high energy efficiency standards in Boulder has led to a rise in housing costs due to requirements to meet energy efficiency guidelines when building and renovating properties. 

“Everybody wants to be very clean [with energy use], and that’s a noble desire, but where the rubber meets the road. It starts making your housing more expensive to build new houses and to remodel houses.” Little said.

“So the housing affordability issue is a deeply complicated topic that actually needs to be addressed on a national level to where we can really understand what’s happening with our housing cost,” Little said. 

Labor shortages among farms, particularly small-scale farms, in Boulder County are continuing to increase. It is as much a symptom as it is a result of other challenges the local agriculture community is facing. Data from the Colorado Agricultural Labor Survey for Employers indicate an increase in reported labor shortages, from 7% to 12.5%, between 2016 and 2020. Additionally, 22% of survey participants reported being unable to obtain all the workers they needed over the last five years. Limited affordable housing, a higher cost of living, a lack of benefits, and minimal incentives for farm workers are among the factors contributing to the labor shortage in Boulder County agriculture. Some entry-level and seasonal farm workers may choose to work elsewhere on larger farms that offer better choices.

“Starting with the real shortage of labor […], the work is very hard, the hours are very long, and many people would think that this is unskilled work. It’s actually highly skilled work to be able to know the differences between all the vegetables, how to use your body, how to use the tools, and how to know when to harvest,” Moss said. 

Farm owners also resort to hiring international farm workers to meet their demands, but it comes at a cost. 

“A lot of employers, farmers in the county, have moved to an H-2A program, which is a visa for agricultural workers […], it adds about $6 an hour to the cost of the employee, because we have to pay for their transportation, bring them to the states, pay for their transportation inside the US, their food, their housing, plus their wage” Moss explained. 

From 2019 to 2024, inflation has increased approximately 22.7%. According to the Colorado Department of Local Affairs, inflation in the Denver-Aurora-Lakewood Consumer Price Index was 1.9% in 2019, 2.0% in 2020, 3.5% in 2021, a steep increase of 8.0% in 2022, 5.2% in 2023, and 2.3% 2024. 

For example, a product that cost $50 in 2019 would have risen to $61.35 in 2024. Michael Moss and his farm have experienced firsthand the effects of the inflation. 

“Since the pandemic, we’ve seen increased costs. The supply shocks of the pandemic increased all of our input costs. Inflation over the last few years has also increased general input costs,” Moss told Yellow Scene.

With a mandatory minimum wage, higher costs, a labor shortage, and a lack of affordable housing, farmers like Michael Moss find it increasingly difficult to maintain their daily operations. 

“I’ve made the decision to liquidate my farm and close it for good after this year. I really feel I’m the first of many local farms that are either going to dramatically downsize or change their business model or go out of business completely.” Moss told Yellow Scene

Others resort to unconventional methods to cope with the rising costs of farming. Byron Kominek is the owner of Jack’s Solar Garden in Longmont, CO. He tells the story of how his traditional 24-acre family farm became a solar garden.

“A large part of it was trying to figure out how to make our family farm financially viable, paying our farm over the years, essentially, [the farm] didn’t pay the bills sufficiently.” Kominek said, “We needed to figure out what else could be done with our land, so that the farm is not an expense, but something that is actually contributing back to the family. So the idea of building a solar array came up to be able to have passive income off of selling electricity.”

In 2020, Kominek used solar energy to integrate agriculture within a solar array. Jack Solar Garden now sells electricity to the equivalent of 300 homes in the community. 

“It has become more profitable than hay ever was on our farm. Helps cover a lot of the costs on the farm, helps provide a base level of income for the farm, while we’re able to still work on the other pieces of land to see how we can make the rest of our property more useful too.” Kominek told Yellow Scene. 

The combined stressors of the minimum wage ordinance, lack of affordable housing, labor shortages, and rising operational costs can take a serious toll on many farm owners and managers. 

“You know, suicides are up in Colorado, in agriculture, and across the country because of the stresses of running a farm. You know, it’s hard on families.” Moss said.

Moss explains that many farmers and their partners often need to work a second job outside of farming to keep up with rising costs. He also had to make some sacrifices, including spending long days at the farm and missing out on crucial parenting time with his five-year-old child. 

“So there’s financial pressures, there’s business pressures, there are environmental pressures that make farming really taxing,” Moss said 

Lauren Dunteman is the Director of the Flatirons Farmers Coalition.

“Farmer mental health is a particular crisis that needs to be addressed. A lot of times, farmers are working in the heat […], the Boulder County area also really struggles with dangerously windy days, and it can be really exhausting, physically and mentally, for farmers to be out in the field for 12 hours a day,” Dunteman said. 

Dunteman also believes that the strain experienced by farmers in the community is often exacerbated by a variety of challenges they face simultaneously.

Farm owner, Michael Moss, might soon be closing the door of Kilt Farm after 12 years in business. 

“This is really emotional for me. I won’t be feeding the 500 families. I won’t be putting my food into the local grocery stores. I’ve seen children grow up eating my food, and I’m not going to be able to do that anymore. So that’s a loss. If we continue down this path, we’re going to lose a lot of the small restaurants in unincorporated Boulder County,” Moss told Yellow Scene.

COFA, the Community Farmers Alliance, is asking the county commissioners to pause the minimum wage increases and shift to a Consumer Price Index (CPI) rate adjustment so that the county can be more aligned with the City of Boulder  by 2030. 

“We’re also working closely with other organizations and county commissioner Marta Loachamin to focus on ways to address the affordable housing for farm workers, possibly voucher programs, possibly home ownership programs, so our farm workers can be long-term members of the community,” Moss said.

Commissioner Ashley Stolzmann is aware of the challenges farmers face and is working to advance regenerative agriculture as a path toward a more sustainable future. Stressors such as the cost of supplies, maintenance parts, and equipment have increased considerably in recent years.

“We work on farmers’ issues and ranchers’ issues […], and talk about what we’re seeing in the different areas of the country and how we can try to affect policies like the Farm Bill, policies like the visa programs, H2A and H2B visas. We write letters and testify before Congress to try to get them to make changes.” Commissioner Stolzmann said. 

President Trump’s aggressive tariff policy has introduced new layers of risk for American farmers. Canada supplies a significant share of U.S. fertilizer, making the 35% tariff on Canadian goods a direct hit on farm operating costs. China, the world’s largest agricultural importer, has responded to U.S. tariffs by imposing retaliatory duties of 10 to 15% on American wheat, corn, and soybeans, cutting off key export markets. For farmers trying to plan a season, that kind of volatility makes stable decision-making nearly impossible.

However, Trump’s era disruptions are far from the only factor at play in this crisis. Policy makers are often faced with challenges where there are competing interests from their constituents. Farm owners need to be able to afford their operating costs while farm workers need to be able to afford basic necessities like food, housing, and rent. 

“If you look at what our minimum wage is now, where it’s $16.57 [per hour], it’s not a reasonable price to pay a person to work for an hour. Picking vegetables in a field is hard. Working in the sun all day is hard.” Commissioner Stolzmann said. 

The minimum wage ordinance was legislated by the state over the last couple of years to address some of the farm workers’ rights and to try to make the job safer and more secure for everyone. 

“I completely acknowledge and recognize that it puts burdens on the business owners who own the land and own the business. But we have to really make sure that we’re caring for the whole society, and the businesses won’t succeed if their workers aren’t succeeding.” Commissioner Stolzmann told Yellow Scene.

The County Commissioners implemented a Business Assistance Program to offer direct cash assistance, as well as free support from the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Boulder County Colorado State University Extension Office (CSU).

“At the county commissioner level, there’s actually a lot of agreement on helping farmers and ranchers.” Commissioner Stolzmann told Yellow Scene.

Some small steps individuals can take to support local agriculture include shopping locally, connecting with farmers, and purchasing food from those who produce it in a manner aligned with one’s values.

“I think addressing labor issues and addressing how people are purchasing and programming is necessary to realize a more fruitful future for all of us.” Commissioner Stolzmann said.

Commissioner Marta Loachamin believes that immigration reform is the key to achieving housing stability nationwide, including in Boulder County.

There are numerous ways the County Commissioners can support small farmers, with the cornerstone that agriculture, self-sufficiency, free production, and local eating are critical components of day-to-day life.

“What else do we do around economic vitality? How do we support small businesses and farmers? How do we not require organic farming specific certifications, but allow people to do organic farming without another cost burden?” Commissioner Loachamin said. 

Commissioner Claire Levy speaks of the initiatives that governments have already put in place to ease the pressures that farmers are facing. 

“Well, we already have, for a long time, a whole variety of grant opportunities for local farmers that address healthy soils, that address those who farm lease land from Boulder County Open Space, and we provide infrastructure improvements, such as irrigation systems.

Commissioner Levy has heard from farmers about their request for revisions to the minimum wage ordinance. While the economic viability of some farms is at risk, farm workers struggle to live and work in Boulder County on the wages they make.

“We did increase the minimum wage because the cost of living in Boulder County is so much higher than in other parts of the state, and so it does not make sense to have one statewide minimum wage when we have such wide differences in the cost of living.” Commissioner Levy said.

The County Commissioner scheduled a County Commissioners’ Business Meeting tentatively in October to discuss possible changes to the local minimum wage ordinance. The future of many farms in unincorporated Boulder may hang in the balance. 

Planning for the future, some farmers are considering how they can adapt to changes to ensure the survival of their farms. 

Byron Kominek of Jack’s Solar Garden is considering ways to reduce labor costs by introducing a U-Pick farm approach and switching to a perennial habitat, an agricultural system where crops live for more than two years without annual replanting. 

“Just trying to put it simply, seeing the cost of wages as they increase, trying to figure out how to remove the need for labor on site as much as possible,” Kominek said.

When it comes to making farming in Boulder County truly sustainable, Laure Kelso believes both the government and the public have a part to play. 

“We need public government programs to really support this work in the normal sort of economy of growing food […], we need the public to rally around these people and help them find solutions that help us get food to our community in a way that also takes care of the people and the environment that’s growing it.” Lauren Kelso said

Nicholas Little, the volunteer with the Boulder County Farm Jobs Alliance, emphasizes the reality of how the economy operates in light of the minimum wage ordinance. In theory, everyone should be paid more money, but Little believes this policy change can have unforeseen consequences. 

“This is the challenge of running any sort of economy […], there is a very careful balance that needs to be walked because if you start tinkering with the economy, you’re going to lose businesses, and so, you have to have an economic policy that enables prosperity,” Little said. 

For the farmers Yellow Scene spoke with, that prosperity still feels a long way off.

If you would like to read more or support the farmers in Boulder County, please visit www.bouldercountyfarmsandjobs.com. To contact your commissioner, you can send a letter using the Action Network campaign created by the Community Farmers Alliance.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post The Shrinking Margins of Boulder County Farming appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Update: Correction to clarify that Civitas is the one driving the deadlines. One of the conditions for the Draco Pad is that all pre-production must be completed by October 15th, 2027.

A brief discussion at Erie’s Dec. 16 Town Council meeting revealed what had previously been kept behind closed doors: Civitas Resources has made an offer to buy Erie’s mineral rights. This revelation immediately raised concerns about transparency and the town’s direction on oil and gas issues.

The comment surfaced as Mayor Andrew Moore introduced a contract with Alameda Mineral Advisors to assess the value of the town’s mineral holdings. Moore described the consulting work as a step to better understand the town’s assets. The explanation, however, included a significant detail.

“This will give us information on what those are worth,” Moore said from the dais. “Civitas has given us an offer, we’re not sure that offer is market-competitive. If nothing else, this will give us that information. This does not approve anything, it doesn’t spend any money, it simply gives us information. Then we can go back and ask the question, ‘Is there enough here? Is this worth it?’”

That statement marked the first time the public learned that Civitas — operator of the widely opposed Draco Pad oil and gas project — had approached the town about purchasing its mineral rights. The matter had previously been discussed only in Executive Session.

Councilmember Dan Hoback said the lack of public discussion is central to the concern.

“All of the details, all of the pros and cons, are happening behind closed doors,” Hoback said. “If this makes it to a council vote, that will be the first the public is hearing of it.”

The announcement also landed in a charged political climate. Residents have long and vocally opposed expanding oil and gas activity, especially around the Draco Pad. Sustainability consistently ranks as one of the community’s top priorities, Hoback noted.

“In our survey, people ranked sustainability as a number one issue they want to focus on, and we’re going against that,” he said.

A potential sale of the town’s mineral rights could carry consequences for nearby property owners. Under Colorado law, a sale could enable pooling, a practice that allows an operator to combine adjacent mineral interests into a single unit for development.

“One consequence could be, what is called forced pooling, where mineral rights owners are forced to sell their minerals when a company obtains their rights to a certain percentage of surrounding rights,” Hoback said.

He added that timing may also be a factor.

For many residents already skeptical of oil and gas activity, the thought of a fast-moving, privately negotiated deal could deepen that skepticism. 

“Given how opposed people were to Draco,” Hoback said, “this will definitely lead to a concerning lack of trust from the residents.”

His assessment of the situation was blunt: “We’re dancing with the devil.”

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post A Civitas Offer Brings Erie’s Mineral Rights Into the Spotlight appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Learning of the Mayor’s intentions to fire Town Manager, Malcolm Fleming, citizens of the City of Erie rallied together, sending their district representatives’ emails and offering public comment. It is clear that Mayor Moore’s intention of doing this quietly, and in secret, would not materialize. 

However – despite the resistance from community and council members alike – in a four to three majority, the council voted to terminate Malcolm Fleming at the end of the evening. 

The council session began with presentations on public art projects and a proposal to increase the town’s airport fees. For hours, careful consideration and thoughtful questions were circulated between town leaders on an issue of obvious importance to locals. As many had come to discuss this issue during public comment as did the town manager.

As the aeronautic talk concluded, Mayor Moore introduced the motion to bring the body to executive session, Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell reading the agenda item to be discussed: personnel.

Councilman Dan Hoback called a point of order, “this executive session matter was started in public session, I believe it should continue in public session.”

Mayor Moore listens to public comment while the Town of Erie Council discusses his future with the city. The body would vote 4-3 at the end of the meeting on February 17, 2026, to terminate their contract with Mr. Fleming. (Photo by Vince Chandler / Yellow Scene Magazine)

The mayor curved toward Mayor Pro Tem Bell, and urged they take the vote, and if there were not enough votes, they would proceed in public session. Though the majority votes were for executive session – four to three – Mayor Moore needed five. This meeting would remain open to the public.

Council members Baer, Hoback, and Pesamarelli all asserted their case that Malcolm not lose his position. 

Council member Baer endeavoring to persuade her colleagues, affirmed, “[The mayor] did not have consensus or a majority, originally, to bring this forward, and I’m very hopeful to my fellow council members that that remains the case; that you hold your ground, that you’re brave right now, and not strong armed to do the mayor’s bidding.”

Council member Pesamarelli appeared to resign himself to the fact that he would not be able to change the council’s mind; their decision was stated to be already made. From the three council members who fought in Malcolm’s corner, attention shifted to the four who didn’t.

Malcolm Fleming listens while the Town of Erie Council discusses his future with the city. The body would vote 4-3 at the end of the meeting on February 17, 2026, to terminate their contract with Mr. Fleming. “I wish everyone well and encourage them to honor the pledge enshrined in the Erie Town Charter to, “uphold the principles of democracy, equity, and justice, and to foster a community that is inclusive, diverse, and welcoming to all,” he told Yellow Scene Magazine. (Photo by Vince Chandler / Yellow Scene Magazine)

Council member Mortellaro was quiet, but Council member O’Connor and Mayor Pro Tem Bell scolded Pesamarelli, Baer, and Hoback for wanting this conversation privy to the public. 

Councilman O’Connor called it “inappropriate” to have this discussion in the open.

“I wish we could have had that discussion in exec, because what I wanted to see was that we could have a mutual agreement to part ways…  I think Malcolm wanted to have that conversation. I sincerely regret that we can’t have that conversation right now, because I feel that would have been better,” Councilman Bell said, addressing his colleagues,“And that’s due to three people up here wanting to make this a public show.” 

Mayor Moore set the vote in motion by expressing, “[Malcolm] told me, ‘If there’s four votes, then I would rather just be able to negotiate the separation agreement.’ And I said, ‘I don’t know if I have the four votes, but I do know I want to find out if I have the four votes.”

Yellow Scene received this statement from Mr. Fleming the following day: 

“Erie has a fantastic team, including great Town staff throughout the organization. I loved working with them, as well as with current and past members of the Town Council and advisory boards and Planning Commission. I will miss them all and I am proud of the long list of accomplishments we achieved together.

Erie is a great place. Our teamwork over the past 7 years made it even better and positioned the Town to prosper in the future. I wish everyone well and encourage them to honor the pledge enshrined in the Erie Town Charter to, “uphold the principles of democracy, equity, and justice, and to foster a community that is inclusive, diverse, and welcoming to all.”

---

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Town of Erie Fires Town Manager Malcolm Fleming appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

In a mostly empty town hall chamber, after a lone person offered public comment calling on the town to pledge protection for constituents from ICE and CBP followed by a hearing on sign regulations, Erie Mayor Andrew Moore looked calm and cool as he began the proceedings to move the meeting to executive session.

“Point of order,” a calm voice interrupted. Addressing the Mayor, Councilwoman Emily Baer continued. “I would like to discuss the town manager’s review in the public meeting rather than in executive session.”

Flustered, Mayor Moore shifted in his seat, turned toward Malcolm asking if this was alright. Malcolm, without batting an eye, responded, “Yes, I’m comfortable with that happening in a public meeting.”

Forty-five minutes later, the gavel restarted the public meeting for a conversation intended to happen in executive privacy. For the second time in the first year of his term, Mayor Andrew Moore would make the case for firing town manager Malcom Fleming. 

Previously catching the rest of the town council off guard during an earlier meeting, the decision was made to table the conversation until another time, when the members could be more prepared to make an informed decision.

Erie Town Manager Malcolm Fleming is described in his HR evaluation as one who “often pushes staff to challenge their status quo, which drives innovation, and he’s always open to and excited by new ideas.” (Town of Erie Headshot)

This time, with less than a day’s notice, the council received communication via email from Mayor Moore that they would again be bringing the matter to executive session the following evening. A performance evaluation – referred to as Fleming’s 360 – had been conducted. 

Mayor Moore and Mr. Fleming had access to the 360, some members of the council did not until only a few hours before the conversation began, others wouldn’t see the document until the following day. 

“He provided us an email about 24 hours before the meeting, and that is not adequate time,” Erie Town Councilman Dan Hoback told Yellow Scene. “The manager’s evaluation did not come from him; it came from the town manager himself. And [the Mayor] kept that in his hip pocket, and he didn’t send it until the next day. The day after the council meeting… I thought that was very underhanded on the part of the mayor.”

Opening the now public conversation, Mayor Moore cited his reasons for why Fleming should be terminated, reading from a statement he’d prepared for his colleagues. 

“Leadership by omission – whether intentional or not – creates a situation in which I cannot effectively preside over our meetings. Getting caught off guard on the County Line to Airport Drive visibility scope, the $19M parks and open space facility, the Redtail Ranch information for the public not being disseminated, misinformation about the use of ARPID funds, and council volunteers being excluded from the holiday party are just some of the more recent challenges.” 

Erie’s Mayor read for several minutes, first from his email requesting the conversation and then from what would have been his opening address to Council in executive session, concluding that he believed there had been an ongoing  lack of communication on Fleming’s part and little else. 

“The thing is, see, everything looks so childish now,” Councilman Pesaramelli told Yellow Scene. “He doesn’t have any points because we brought it on the record and not between the four walls [executive session]. In the four walls, when this topic came up,[the Mayor] didn’t have a consensus that Malcolm should be fired… And what would have happened in that four walls is unimaginable.”

“The mayor has wanted to get rid of him now since day one,” Councilman Hoback told Yellow Scene Magazine. “He came into office wanting to get rid of him, and I think it is probably because he is ideologically out of alignment.”

Before joining the city staff, Fleming spent over ten years as city manager for Louisville and as interim city manager for Manitou before that. He was appointed to the role in Erie in January 2019

Yellow Scene Magazine obtained a copy of Mr. Fleming’s 360 evaluation, which he said from the dais he was comfortable seeing published. In it we see a portrait of an absolutely adequate employee, referred to as a consummate professional, constantly calm presence, and consistently informed manager.

A screenshot of the first page of the human resources 360 report for colleague feedback for Mr. Fleming.

The anonymous reflections assert that he is knowledgeable, experienced, and committed to exploring every avenue even if it means trying something new. Always room for improvement, it is noted that he sometimes lapses in communication, though regularly producing a cumulative and comprehensive – if delayed – response. 

A five out of five star rated employee in “contributing to a positive and inclusive work culture,” he manages a complex system of public and private bureaucracies facilitating connections and the sharing of resources. 

“The amount of information that flows from the community, businesses, regional partners and Council is significant and overwhelming at times,” one 360 reflection of Fleming reads. It continues the he should seek improvement in maintaining the flow of information because “this Council is more impatient than others.”

Despite the metaphorical firehose from which he drinks, the HR report speaks of a competent employee with an above average performance and below average need for improvement. One with whom so many in the city find ease in maintaining a professional relationship, Mayor Moore not counted amongst them.

“If things are done for the betterment of the town, I’m all for it,” Councilman Pesaramelli told Yellow Scene. “But when you come with things like erasing DEI or the scare tactics, we can be a model and let other towns know Erie did this. We stood up against national bullying.”

Councilman Pesaramelli, Councilman Hoback, and Councilwoman Baer were upset that Moore came to this conclusion by himself, when council is meant to decide something this important together. When informed there would be a decision made despite protest, the three council members all voiced opposition to terminating Fleming’s position.

“Why is this going into a rush?” Councilman Pesaramelli mused during a followup conversation. “We already talked about it, and there was no consensus from the council for him to move to the next step or do another executive session.”

Some would discuss Mayor Moore’s insistence on adherence only on background, others commented openly on the parallels as they perceived them.

“He keeps saying he’s not MAGA, but he runs Council like he is,” Councilman Dan Hoback said to Yellow Scene Magazine. 

A screenshot of Erie Town Manager Malcolm Fleming’s Council Feedback Form, indicating the average of all five members of Erie’s Town Council’s ratings for various professional metrics.

Authoritarian overreach continues to grow as a standard in civics conversations. Federally, the Trump Administration demonstrates the ability for unscrupulous leaders to demand their directors change reports – and disavows those which won’t – to match policy positions. The same tactics some allege are used by Mayor Moore. 

“Staff can hear the mayor yelling at Malcolm through the walls even when the door is closed,” reads the 360. “Malcolm stays focused and professional and speaks clearly and directly.” 

In line with the strong man caricature some politicians project, complaints continue that Mayor Moore will bully employees, becoming increasingly frustrated when facts don’t fit his narrative, and asserting aggression to accomplish his ends. 

“People are hurting. People are afraid of losing their jobs,” Councilman Hoback told Yellow Scene. “People are afraid and they don’t want to engage with him.”

When negotiating his most recent contract, Fleming was faced with the difficult decision of forgoing protected severance in exchange for a standard raise. With the possibility that a newly-elected leader with a well-known intention of focusing on raising homeowners’ property value may replace him, Fleming was forced to concede his safety net. 

“One of his first courses of action was to basically force Malcolm to renegotiate his contract and lower his severance package, essentially,” Councilman Hoback told Yellow Scene. “The mayor said, ‘You will either reduce your severance package from twelve months to six months, or you won’t get a salary increase this year at all.’ Malcolm’s already severely underpaid for our region.”

Under the new contract, Fleming would receive 6-months of his salary, about $91,344, a direct cost to the taxpayers for the town manager’s replacement. Compensated well below the mean for this position, his replacement could start at a salary closer to Longmont’s $242,902 or Lafayette’s $190,800.

Some members of Town Council and Mayor Moore did not respond to requests for comment before publication.

The agenda for Erie’s February 17, 2026 Town Meeting includes an item in the evening’s executive session concerning personnel “pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)(e), concerning the Town Manager’s evaluation and contract.”

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Erie Mayor’s Attempts to Fire Town Manager Made Public appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The council chambers in Lafayette were packed Tuesday night, with overflow crowds filling the City Hall lobby after seats inside ran out. The unusually large turnout reflected the stakes of the evening’s agenda, which was dominated by discussion of The Range, a proposed development at Arapahoe Road and U.S. 287.

Currently located in unincorporated Boulder County, the plot is one of the last major undeveloped areas within Lafayette’s Urban Growth Boundary. The land would be annexed by the city as part of the Range’s development.

Debate over the 38 acre parcel, one of the last major undeveloped tracts in Lafayette, stretched across most of a six hour meeting and drew sharp criticism from residents, repeated calls for decorum from Mayor Tapia Vega, and pointed questions from City Council.

For the first time, City Council held a quasi judicial public hearing on a sketch plan for The Range, forwarded by the Planning Commission. The hearing was not a final vote, but an opportunity for council members to ask questions and issue comments on the proposal.

The project is being developed by Kensington, a firm specializing in mixed use and retail developments. The current sketch plan proposes 448 apartment units in buildings up to 60 feet tall, along with 156,000 square feet of commercial space.

Under Lafayette code, developers are required to dedicate a portion of their project to public use. The Public Land Dedication in the sketch plan is limited to walking paths along Arapahoe and 287, and the land around the detention pond, but not including the detention pond.

One corner of the site was left undefined in the sketch plan, marked only as To Be Determined. Council members and residents alike flagged the lack of detail as a major concern. Kensington requested that the land be rezoned from agricultural to residential and or commercial alongside the rest of the property. The Kensington representative also noted that this corner sits at the highest point on the property and is included in the proposed height increase to 60 feet.

Council Member David Fridland questioned the placement of a pedestrian path so close to a busy highway, prompting audible hoots from the crowd inside chambers.

Resident Tyler Johnson Remarking on The Range proposal

Public opposition intensified during the second public comment period, with residents repeatedly criticizing the scale and design of the project.

Speakers described the plan as “Short sighted,” and “A copy and paste look at what is across the street in Erie.”

One resident likened the proposal to “Concrete boxes next to concrete boxes with concrete parking spaces in between.”

Richard Binzel, a resident of the nearby Stonehenge development, held up a recent photograph of the parcel and pointed to the unobstructed mountain views. He noted that the view mirrors the imagery used in Lafayette’s city logo and warned that the proposed 60 foot buildings would permanently block it.

When council members weighed in later in the meeting, several echoed the sense that the project still needed significant work.

Mayor Pro Tem Tim Barnes acknowledged improvements Kensington has made since discussions began in 2022 but said the plan still falls short. “We haven’t hit the flow […] I don’t think we’re there yet,” Barnes said.

He also returned to the unresolved corner of the site. “I’m not comfortable moving out of sketch without knowing what [this land] is [for],” he said.

Council Member Kyle Beaulieu was more direct, calling the proposal “astronomically far away from core aspects of our comp plan.” He added, “It’s almost like you designed it with spaces where people don’t get to know each other.”

Following the City Council meeting, a preliminary plan for the Kensington development will head to the Planning Commission.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Packed Chambers as Lafayette Reviews 448 Unit Development appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Lafayette City Council convened at 5:30 p.m. on Jan. 20 for a brief meeting that centered on a proposed expansion by hazardous materials company Ionex and reflections on the city’s Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebrations.

During public comment, a resident thanked the council for its recent federal petition to the Federal Aviation Administration challenging changes to flight routes out of Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport in Broomfield. Another resident spoke in support of the planned expansion of the Ionex complex on 120th Avenue, urging council to approve the project.

Chelsea Pennington Hahn of the Lafayette History Museum introduced herself to council and invited members to tour the museum at 103 E. Simpson St. She reminded council that the museum is partially funded by an excise tax on Lafayette storage units and that the city owns the historic Lewis House, which serves as the museum’s headquarters. Pennington also noted the museum recently received a grant from the State Historical Fund.

She was followed by Mike Pascoe, president of the Lafayette Historical Society, who announced a new exhibit titled New Views of Lafayette. An open house is scheduled for Saturday, Jan. 24, from 10 a.m. to noon and will include a family-friendly time capsule project.

Another resident raised safety concerns about the west side of the Coal Creek Trail, describing it as too narrow for mixed use by pedestrians and bicyclists. That section of the trail dates back to 1992 and is the oldest portion of the system.

Council unanimously approved minutes from its previous meeting and issued a proclamation recognizing Great Kindness Challenge Week. Mayor Pro-Tem Tim Barnes noted the proclamation was fitting coming the day after the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. Lafayette’s Peak to Peak Charter School has participated in the challenge since 2022.

The main item of regular business was a resolution to approve a Site Plan and Architectural Review for Ionex, a Lafayette-based company founded in 1978 that develops processes for handling hazardous materials. Ionex moved to Lafayette in 1982 and currently operates an office building and technical research center at the site.

The company plans to construct an additional 23,000-square-foot building, partially funded by a government grant. The proposal also included a request to reduce required parking from 155 spaces to 120, a 22.5 percent reduction that triggered City Council review. Ionex currently employs about 90 people and expects to grow to 120 employees.

Planning Manager Jake Nitchals told council the Planning Commission had unanimously approved the site plan. He highlighted the project’s preservation of existing trees and its water conservation features. The new design would replace the parking lot along 120th Avenue with a centrally located lot to allow trucks to load and unload from the new building, according to Catherine Wilkinson of the architectural firm Holland Basham.

Councilor Annmarie Jensen asked about lighting and potential light pollution. Nitchals said the plan emphasizes downward-facing fixtures to minimize impact. Jensen also asked whether Ionex handles hazardous waste at its Lafayette location. CEO Doug Porrey said it does not, and Nitchals added that the fire marshal identified compressed gas as the most dangerous material on site.

CEO Doug Porrey Speaking

Councilor Adam Gianola, attending remotely, questioned the parking reduction and future bicycle parking. Nitchals said parking was not heavily debated by the Planning Commission but confirmed interest in adding interior bicycle storage for employees. Wilkinson said bicycle parking had been discussed but not formally included, though Porrey said encouraging bike commuting was a “great idea.” Wilkinson also noted an abandoned railroad corridor near the property is expected to become a future bike path.

Several council members praised the landscaping plan, with Jensen calling it “very exciting” and expressing hope it could serve as a model. Council unanimously approved the resolution.

Council then approved a separate resolution extending the city’s ground lease on the Louisville Tower, a 150-foot radio tower in Louisville owned by Lafayette since 2001, through 2031.

In staff reports, City Attorney Mary Lynn updated council on Lafayette’s ongoing lawsuit against the state challenging 2024 laws requiring certain cities to increase housing density and reduce minimum parking requirements. City Manager Kady Doelling recapped the city’s MLK Jr. Day celebration and announced applications are open for Lafayette’s Poet Laureate position, which includes a $2,500 stipend. Applications close Feb. 20.

Council reports focused largely on praise for the MLK Jr. event. Mayor J.D. Tapia Vega called it “incredible,” while Jensen credited Councilor Crystal Gallegos and the Youth Advisory Board for their work organizing the celebration. Gallegos thanked East Simpson Coffee Company and Tacos Ay Ay Ay for their support.

Additional updates included Jensen’s attendance at the opening of a quilting exhibit at the Collective Community Arts Center, Councilor David Fridland’s first meeting with the Colorado Municipal League, and Barnes highlighting grants available through the Downtown Development Authority. Tapia Vega also acknowledged former council member Kenny Nguyen, now serving in the state House representing District 33.

Council adjourned at 6:41 p.m. Members then headed into executive session to discuss annexations at Nine Mile Corner.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Lafayette backs Ionex expansion, reflects on MLK Jr. celebrations appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

ERIE, Colorado—Residents raised concerns about flooding, drainage infrastructure and accountability during public comment at the Erie Town Council meeting Tuesday night, as council members also approved major financial, accessibility and community funding measures.

Several speakers described ongoing groundwater and drainage issues affecting homes and properties near recent developments. John Rondash of Lafayette told council members he is pumping approximately 100 gallons of water per hour from his basement and said groundwater saturation has caused his septic system to fail. Rondash cited standing water in culverts near KB Home’s Nest Reserve at Canyon Creek development and asked the town to commission an independent hydrological assessment and improve communication with affected residents.

Meg Noffsinger, also of Lafayette, echoed those concerns and said she previously lost her home in Lyons due to extreme flooding. She told council she rebuilt and invested everything she had into her current property but is now facing similar conditions. Noffsinger said her horse can no longer live on the property due to recurring hoof abscesses caused by wet ground conditions. She urged the town to address what she described as a lack of accountability.

Additional comments focused on drainage ponds associated with the Colorado National Golf Club facility in Erie. Christine Emerson and Derek Tuz, both Erie residents, expressed concern about the maintenance, elevation and infrastructure of the ponds, particularly Pond 820. While noting the environmental and wildlife benefits of the ponds, Tuz said drainage pipe elevation and long-term maintenance plans remain unresolved. Speakers also referenced difficulties obtaining public records related to the issue through Colorado Open Records Act requests.

Following public comment, the council approved several agenda items unanimously.

Courtesy of the City

Martin Luther King Jr Day

Council members adopted a proclamation recognizing Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Jan. 19, 2026, with the national theme “Mission Possible 2: Building Community, Uniting a Nation the Nonviolent Way,” and encouraged residents to observe the holiday.

Capitol Projects

The council also approved an ordinance establishing financial parameters for the acquisition and construction of several capital projects, including an expanded police station, a public safety building, mine mitigation work in the Town Center area and improvements to the Erie Community Center. The public safety building carries an estimated cost of up to $47 million. Under the approved framework, the town would incur approximately $3.4 million in annual debt over 30 years at an interest rate of about 4.66 percent, with the option to renegotiate after 10 years. Town officials said additional information will be shared with residents about opportunities to purchase bonds related to the projects.

Americans with Disabilities Act

Council members also adopted the town’s Americans with Disabilities Act Access Audit and Transition Plan. The plan, developed by the WT Group following audits conducted between 2023 and 2026, identifies barriers to accessibility in town facilities, parks and rights-of-way under Title II of the ADA. The plan outlines methods for improving access, assigns responsible officials and establishes a long-term retrofit schedule. Minimum compliance is projected to take 16 years at an estimated cost of $250,000 annually, though total costs could reach $40 million if optional improvements such as trail upgrades are included.

Grants to Communities Program

Finally, the council approved funding allocations through the 2026 Grants to Communities Program. With $80,000 available, which is less than in previous years despite $200,000 in requests, the council prioritized organizations providing direct services over event-based nonprofits. Officials noted that demand for grant funding continues to exceed available resources.

The post Erie Addresses Flooding Approves Capital Financing and Grants appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Louisville City Council’s Jan. 13 special meeting centered on the city’s Comprehensive Plan, a 20-year policy document that will guide future development, housing, infrastructure and land use decisions.

City staff and council members emphasized that the plan is intended to function as a flexible framework rather than a prescriptive rulebook. While the main document outlines broad policy goals, it also includes a short Action Plan appendix that identifies specific tasks the city could pursue to implement those goals. Officials said the appendix was designed to allow future councils to adjust strategies if conditions or priorities change.

In total, the plan outlines roughly 50 goals related to growth, land use, housing and infrastructure. The mayor and planning staff described it as a tool to support more balanced decision-making as Louisville continues to grow.

Affordable housing emerged as a central theme of the discussion. City staff noted that while Louisville has seen steady job growth over the past 15 years, housing production has not kept pace. The plan aims to close that gap by increasing residential development and expanding the range of housing options available.

Proposals include allowing more diverse housing types, such as duplexes, in areas currently dominated by single-family homes. Rather than treating affordability as a standalone issue, the plan integrates housing goals into broader land use and growth strategies.

Council members also reviewed proposed “place types,” which define the scale and density of future development across the city. The plan projects potential growth over the next two decades and outlines how infrastructure, public services and utilities could be planned to support it.

Figure 4. Community Statistics Breakdown
Compiled using data from the City of Louisville, the Louisville Housing Assessment, the 2020 U.S. Census, and the 2023 ESRI Business Analyst.

According to council members, the framework is intended to accommodate growth at a manageable pace while maintaining a diverse tax base and protecting natural resources. Sustainability considerations are incorporated throughout the document.

A future Land Use Map included in the plan estimates potential buildout capacity across the city. Officials said the map is intended to help developers and residents understand where growth is anticipated and how infrastructure investments may be prioritized, while still reflecting community values.

The council also discussed how land use planning could support economic development and tourism. Members referenced large-scale events, such as the Sundance Film Festival, as examples of opportunities that could bring economic activity and community engagement if infrastructure and land use policies are aligned to support them.

Throughout the meeting, council members stressed that the Comprehensive Plan can be amended over time and that public input will continue to play a role in shaping its implementation. One member encouraged residents to participate and help guide future decisions.

The meeting concluded with a reminder about a city-hosted open house at The Simon, at the corner of South and Main streets. The event is intended to provide residents with information about the Comprehensive Plan and an opportunity to submit feedback.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Louisville Lays Out 20-Year Vision for Housing and Development appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

On the night of January 6, the Erie Town Council held a special meeting to confront a question that will shape the town’s next several decades: how dense Erie should become as it grows. The discussion centered on Erie’s Comprehensive Plan, particularly future land use designations and the residential densities tied to them. While no votes were taken, council members were asked to give staff direction on how aggressively the town should plan for growth as Erie prepares to nearly double its population.

Erie’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan updated land use densities for the first time since 2005. The changes were designed to accommodate town-approved growth from roughly 40,000 residents today to 85,000 or more in the coming years. Mayor Andrew Moore framed the meeting as a chance to step back and assess whether those density assumptions still align with market realities, infrastructure capacity, and community priorities. Town staff explained that one of the immediate challenges is that the Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code do not currently match. While the plan outlines where growth should happen and at what intensity, the UDC governs what can actually be built. The two have not been fully synchronized since the 2005 plan.

To address that gap, the town has set aside $250,000 in its 2026 budget to hire a consultant to update the UDC, a process council members hope to complete by 2027. Until then, staff is using the Comprehensive Plan as a guiding document while flagging areas where inconsistencies could complicate future development decisions.

Much of the conversation focused on how specific properties could influence Erie’s growth pattern. Council members discussed the southwest corner of 111th Street and Arapahoe Road, the Golden Run project between 119th Street and County Line Road, and the I-25 gateway at Erie Parkway as key sites where density decisions will carry outsized consequences.

Affordable housing also surfaced as a point of tension. Moore said the town needs to better understand how affordable and attainable housing fits within Erie’s budget and infrastructure constraints, adding that a separate session devoted entirely to the issue is likely in the future.

Currently, the town of Erie aims to establish 12% of its housing stock as affordable by 2035, with the town’s Housing Needs Assessment and Affordable Housing Strategy emphasizing a need to increase diversity in housing tenure, price-point, and types. Among the goals of the town’s housing strategy is to incorporate mixed-income neighborhoods into new annexations, including the purchase of land north of the historic Briggs Street, to increase that diversity.

Members of the council have diverging thoughts about the direction of a final project. Moore has previously questioned if the Briggs project, dubbed “Village of Coal Creek,” would be suitable for any housing. The final project has been stalled numerous times, with Councilmember Anil Pesaramelli arguing that the town continues delaying meaningful conversations about affordable housing rather than advancing them. Moore pushed back in the most recent meeting, saying developers often recoup the cost of affordable units either through reduced profits or by offsetting costs elsewhere in a project, and that the town must be realistic about financial tradeoffs.

Transportation emerged as another factor closely tied to density decisions. Erie’s Transportation and Mobility Division announced it is negotiating with RTD to extend the Dash bus route from Willoughby Corner in Lafayette to the Erie Community Center. The proposed route would travel along Highway 7 and Coal Creek Boulevard, improving transit access through central Erie. Transit access matters because proximity to transportation is a major criterion for higher-density zoning. Moore noted that a potential shift of the Jump bus route from 119th Street to County Line Road could affect whether nearby properties qualify for higher-density designations. In one case, land owned by developer Aaron Harber could become ineligible for higher density if the route moves farther away.

Taken together, the meeting underscored that Erie’s growth decisions are becoming more interconnected and more consequential. Choices about zoning, transit, and housing are no longer abstract planning exercises. They will determine where people can live, how they move around town, and whether Erie grows up, grows out, or attempts to do both at once.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Erie Council Reviews Growth Plans as Town Expands appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Recently, the City of Boulder moved to narrow the scope of the Police Oversight Panel’s work, a decision that has drawn pushback from panel members and residents who say it weakens civilian oversight of police misconduct, particularly in cases involving use of force and allegations of discrimination.

Under the change, the police monitor, not the 11-member civilian panel, now has greater authority to decide which misconduct complaints reach the panel for review. City officials say the shift is necessary to conserve limited resources and focus attention on the most serious cases. Panel members argue it reduces transparency and undercuts the panel’s original purpose.

When Boulder created the Police Oversight Panel, it was intended to increase accountability and public trust in policing by ensuring independent civilian review of internal investigations. That structure required the police monitor to summarize every misconduct complaint for the panel, allowing members to weigh in even when allegations were ultimately deemed unfounded. That process is now changing.

Under the new system, complaints are first reviewed by the police department’s Professional Standards Unit. The police monitor and the unit then jointly determine whether a complaint is unfounded or warrants further investigation. If both agree that a complaint is unfounded, it does not go to the panel at all. The Chief of Police retains final authority over disciplinary outcomes.

The panel’s mandate remains unchanged on paper. It is still required to review critical incidents involving serious bodily injury and to make recommendations on disciplinary actions following internal investigations. Those recommendations are forwarded to the city manager, city council, and the police chief. But panel members say the new screening process limits their ability to independently assess how misconduct complaints are handled, particularly in cases that may fall short of serious injury but still raise concerns about police behavior.

Police Monitor Sherry Daun outlined the updated process during a December meeting. After receiving a complaint, her office sends it to the Professional Standards Unit for a preliminary review. If the unit determines the officer’s actions were consistent with department policy, the case may be classified as unfounded or exonerated and never reach the panel. Further investigation only proceeds if the unit agrees it is warranted.

Daun said her role includes reviewing evidence, requesting additional materials when necessary, applying department rules, and drafting allegations and recommendations. She also certifies that investigations are fair and complete. While the panel can still review certain cases, the timing and scope of those referrals now rest largely with the monitor.

Before coming to Boulder, Daun worked as director of investigations for Chicago’s Civilian Office of Police Accountability, which operates under a fully investigative model. “We did the complete investigations,” she said during the meeting, describing a system where civilian investigators handled police misconduct cases from start to finish.

Sherry Daun Photo Courtesy of City

Daun explained that cases are typically classified as serious misconduct, misconduct investigations, community inquiries, community feedback, or unspecified incidents. Allegations are deemed unfounded when the officer did not commit the alleged act or was not involved, and exonerated when the officer’s actions are found to be lawful or justified under department policy.

Several panel members and residents raised concerns about relying on internal determinations to screen out complaints. They pointed to situations where officers may technically follow policy while still causing harm or eroding community trust. Others questioned the fairness of officers investigating fellow officers, arguing that even well-intentioned internal reviews can carry inherent bias.

Daun defended the change as a matter of efficiency and due process. “The city must not unduly extend investigations when there is sufficient evidence to determine that the officer’s actions were within policy,” she said, adding that the approach aligns with commitments to fairness for both officers and complainants.

Lizzie Friend, a co-chair of the Oversight Panel, suggested creating a clearer process for information sharing that preserves transparency without interfering in investigations. She called for more proactive data sharing and regular reporting so the panel can understand patterns and context, even when individual cases are screened out early.

Public comment during the meeting reflected deeper concerns about the city’s history with police accountability, particularly in cases involving people of color. Several speakers referenced the 2019 case of Zayd Atkinson, a Black Naropa University student who was repeatedly questioned by police outside his apartment while picking up trash. The incident drew national attention and played a central role in the creation of the Oversight Panel.

For many residents, that case exemplifies why broad civilian review matters. They warned that allowing complaints to be filtered out before reaching the panel risks repeating past failures and undermines the reason the panel exists at all.

During the December meeting, multiple community members warned that limiting the panel’s access to misconduct complaints could allow discriminatory or harmful behavior to go unexamined. Speakers said the new screening process shifts the panel’s role from independent oversight to a largely advisory function, reducing its ability to challenge internal police conclusions or identify broader patterns of misconduct.

“The panel needs to have full transparency and oversight to prevent cases of discrimination and police violence,” one community member said during public comment. “I believe that the panel needs to be empowered to do their job and not have new processes prevent that”

As the city moves forward with the new policy, panel members have called for stronger transparency measures to ensure civilian oversight remains more than symbolic, and that complaints, particularly those involving use of force or discrimination, do not disappear behind closed doors.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter — and get our print edition delivered to your home each month.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. For 25 years, we’ve told the truth — your support helps us keep doing it for the next four and beyond. Administrations come and go. Our team stays, ready to lead no matter who’s in charge.

The post Meeting Clarifies Changes to Boulder Police Oversight Panel appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

On Tuesday, Conservation Colorado convened a press conference to take stock of where the state stands on its climate promises and where it may still be falling short.

The event centered on a new study by Sustainability Solutions Group, commissioned by Conservation Colorado alongside GreenLatinos, the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, Western Resource Advocates, and the NAACP CO-MT-WY State Conference. The analysis evaluates Colorado’s existing climate policies and maps out potential pathways for meeting the state’s emissions reduction targets.

Colorado’s current framework traces back to the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction Roadmap, first released by Governor Jared Polis’s administration in September 2020. The roadmap set benchmark goals for cutting emissions compared to 2005 levels, calling for a 26 percent reduction by 2025, 50 percent by 2030, and 90 percent by 2050. A revision issued in January 2021 further committed the state to achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury.

From the outset, environmental groups voiced concern that while the roadmap articulated ambitious goals, it lacked the specificity needed to ensure those targets could be met. Organizations including Conservation Colorado and Western Resource Advocates praised the direction of the plan but warned that it stopped short of outlining concrete, enforceable actions.

That critique resurfaced in February 2024, when the administration released Roadmap 2.0. The update revised the state’s emissions inventory and introduced a set of Near Term Actions intended to guide climate policy through 2026. In a letter opening the document, Polis pushed back on early skepticism, writing that nearly all of the strategies identified in the original roadmap had been implemented over the past three years.

Still, not all advocates were convinced. A joint statement released the same month by the Environmental Defense Fund, Western Resource Advocates, and the Sierra Club noted that the roadmap itself acknowledged Colorado remained off track for its near-term goals, while offering few new mechanisms to close that gap.

The new study presented Tuesday echoes that concern, while also pointing to opportunities. According to Conservation Colorado Vice President of Programs Katie Belgard and GreenLatinos Vice President Ean Tafoya, the findings show that additional policies delivering sharper emissions cuts could reduce the impacts of climate change while also lowering household energy costs and easing long-term Medicaid spending for counties.

Joining them at the press conference were SWEEP Executive Director Elise Jones, NAACP chapter president Omar Montgomery, Sustainability Solutions Group principal consultant Yuill Herbert, and Western Resource Advocates Deputy Director of Policy Development Stacy Tellinghuisen.

Herbert walked attendees through the study’s methodology, describing its goal as identifying sector-specific and economy-wide gaps that must be addressed to meet Colorado’s climate targets. The analysis tracked how energy sources such as gasoline, electricity, and hydrogen move through the economy, how they are ultimately used in transportation, heating, and household equipment, and how those uses translate into costs and emissions.

Researchers modeled six scenarios, including a reference case based on existing policies, a scenario built around new enforceable measures, and four low-carbon pathways that applied more aggressive targets to specific energy sources. Across the board, the results suggested that clearer, more targeted strategies would significantly improve the state’s ability to meet its climate goals.

Tellinghuisen closed the event by underscoring both the urgency and the possibility reflected in the findings. The analysis, she said, confirms that Colorado is not currently on track to meet its climate commitments. At the same time, it shows that the state has multiple viable paths forward, provided policymakers are willing to put stronger measures in place.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192. 

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month! 

The post New Study Finds Colorado is Off Track on Climate Goals appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Erie Town Council voted 4–3 on Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2025, to approve a settlement agreement allowing the Redtail Ranch development to move forward, ending litigation between the Town and the developer and granting approval of a modified preliminary plat.

The vote followed hours of public comment and council debate focused on environmental risk, oil and gas activity, long-term accountability, and whether the project meets Erie’s standard for protecting public health and safety. Councilmembers Hoback, Baer, and Pasermelli voted against the agreement, while Mayor Moore and councilmembers Bell, Mortatello, and O’Connor voted in favor.

At the center of the settlement is an agreement to plug and abandon six oil and gas wells, a condition that allows reduced setbacks and additional residential density. The remaining active wells on and near the site are not subject to remediation requirements under the settlement.

The approved plans locate a restricted environmental area at the northern edge of the development, with homes built beside it and a pedestrian path running alongside it. That area will be separated from residents by a split-rail fence and “Keep Out” signage, rather than further remediation.

Active oil and gas operations remain adjacent to the project, with 23 active wells, 11 of which are classified as low-producing. Within the boundaries of the plat, there are 12 active wells, including 7 low-producing wells.

In Colorado, nearly 1,000 oil and gas wells are currently classified as orphaned, meaning they no longer have a solvent operator responsible for plugging and remediation, according to the state’s Orphaned Well Program.

During the hearing, the developer’s attorneys repeatedly described the site as “clean” and stated that the six oil and gas wells would be “removed.” Under the agreement, those wells will be plugged and abandoned — a standard oil and gas closure process that seals wellbores but does not eliminate subsurface infrastructure or address remaining active wells.

Supporters of the settlement emphasized land rights, regulatory compliance, and the Town’s legal exposure if the lawsuit proceeded.

In his closing remarks before the vote, Mayor Pro-Tem Brandon Bell emphasized property rights, the Town’s exposure under the pending lawsuit, and the project’s compliance with state and local regulations as justification for approving the settlement. Bell also disputed claims that the development was being built “in the middle of a toxic waste site,” arguing that such characterizations were inaccurate and that the project met applicable requirements.

Project exhibits show a restricted environmental area located within the development footprint, with homes built beside it, while active oil and gas wells remain within and adjacent to the project area.

Opponents countered that meeting minimum regulatory standards does not resolve cumulative risk, particularly given the site’s history of contamination, proximity to landfills, ongoing oil and gas activity, and the lack of binding requirements for additional remediation. Councilmember Dan Hoback emphasized that Erie’s Unified Development Code intentionally leaves “health and safety” undefined, placing responsibility on the Town Council — not staff or state agencies — to make that determination.

While Mayor Moore noted that additional technical review will occur during the final plat process, approval of the settlement and preliminary plat establishes the project’s entitlement framework and limits the Town’s ability to impose new substantive conditions without reopening litigation.

Further reviews and approvals will be required before construction begins.

View Yellow Scene’s previous coverage of Redtail Ranch.

Drums full of contaminated soil from the north end of the Redtail Ranch property await transport and disposal to a Nebraska incineration facility, December 2017. Photo courtesy of Erie Protectors.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192. 

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month! 

The post Erie Council Approves Redtail Ranch Settlement in 4–3 Vote appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Although November’s elections are over, their meaning is still being argued, especially when it comes to how much tolerance Colorado voters have for candidates linked to far-right extremism.

In some races, incumbents survived and political control barely shifted. In others, voters drew sharper lines. Taken together, the results suggest an electorate negotiating where, exactly, its boundaries lie, particularly when candidates are accused of ties to extremist movements.

That tension was on display in Westminster’s mayoral race.

When Westminster residents went to the polls on Nov. 5, they faced three distinct choices for mayor. Council member Claire Carmelia emerged with a comfortable victory over her two challengers. One of them, David DeMott, spent part of his campaign responding to renewed allegations that he had ties to the far-right extremist group known as the Three Percenters.

David DeMott

The allegations were not new. In 2021, an old photograph surfaced online showing DeMott wearing a hat bearing the Three Percenters’ logo. DeMott has consistently denied being a member of the group, saying the image was mischaracterized and that he does not support extremist ideology.

The Anti-Defamation League describes the Three Percenters as a militia movement that directs its hostility toward “perceived foes, including leftists/antifa, Muslims, and immigrants.” Members broadly share a deep mistrust of government and promote what they describe as a “restoration of the Founders’ Republic.” Unlike more centralized extremist organizations, however, the Three Percenters operate through loosely connected chapters and sympathizers, an ambiguity that often allows political figures to distance themselves from formal membership while still facing scrutiny over association.

Asked about the outcome of the race, DeMott said his loss reflected more than just the controversy. “While there were misleading attacks and a broader national shift that affected many candidates seen as more conservative, I trust the outcome happened as it was meant to,” he said.

Still, the question raised by Westminster voters lingers beyond the city’s borders: was DeMott’s defeat a rejection of candidates linked, directly or indirectly, to extremist movements, or merely the result of local dynamics and a strong opponent?

DeMott is not the first Colorado politician to face questions about extreme views or associations. The state’s most prominent example is U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert.

Elected in 2020 to represent Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, Boebert quickly became one of the most outspoken figures on the far right. She has faced repeated scrutiny for her rhetoric and her past expressions of support for individuals connected to the Three Percenters. In 2023, amid growing backlash in her district, Boebert announced she would seek reelection in the more conservative 4th District. She ultimately won that race.

Her decision to change districts raised a different but related question: did Boebert sense that even conservative voters were growing less willing to tolerate candidates perceived as extreme? And if so, does her success in the 4th District suggest those limits are regional, rather than statewide?

The Three Percenters are only one of several far-right movements that have intersected with Colorado politics in recent years. In 2022, the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights reported that 14 Colorado state legislators had ties to far-right Facebook groups. At the local level, where races receive less scrutiny, the number of officials with similar connections may be even higher.

Those connections have occasionally drawn national attention. On Dec. 3, President Donald Trump used his Truth Social account to criticize Colorado Gov. Jared Polis for not intervening in the imprisonment of former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters. Peters was convicted in 2024 on charges of election interference stemming from her efforts to undermine the results of the 2020 election, which she falsely claimed was stolen. In November 2021, Peters appeared in a video alongside Cory Anderson, a known supporter of the Three Percenters.

Journalist Shane Bauer has traced the ideological roots of the Three Percenters to earlier far-right movements galvanized by the election of President Barack Obama. Writing for Mother Jones, Bauer described how splinter groups formed from older organizations, adapting their strategies and increasingly turning toward electoral politics as a means of influence. In Colorado, this included the emergence of groups like the Three Percent United Patriots, or 3UP.

A protester wears a Three Percenter flag on the East Plaza of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021, ahead of the storming of the Capitol. Photo by Elvert Barnes, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

The strategy, Bauer argued, was simple: if the system could not be overthrown, it could be entered.

Dr. Derek R. Everett, a historian at Metropolitan State University of Denver, said these dynamics are not new to Colorado.

“This brings to mind the 2013 secession movement based in Weld County,” Everett said. “It was motivated by a sentiment that has percolated in Colorado since World War II, essentially the idea that Colorado just doesn’t feel like Colorado anymore.”

That feeling, Everett said, sits at the core of many extremist movements, both in the state and nationally. “You could find that sentiment at the heart of almost any ‘extreme’ group that’s arisen over the past century,” he said, often paired with the belief that the country must be made ‘great’ again, however individuals choose to define that past.

What remains unclear is whether far-right groups are seeing meaningful returns from their engagement with electoral politics. Are these movements successfully normalizing their ideas through candidates and campaigns? Or are recent election results signaling a limit, an electorate willing to tolerate conservative politics, but not associations with extremism?

For now, Colorado’s elections offer no single answer. Instead, they reveal a patchwork of outcomes, shaped by geography, turnout, and local context. But taken together, those outcomes suggest voters are actively negotiating where ideology ends and extremism begins, and whether the two can still coexist on the ballot.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192.

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post Westminster mayoral race highlights broader debate on extremism appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

A community outcry against Flock Security Systems occurred at Longmont’s city council meeting last night. Nearly every seat was full and 90% of those in attendance were there to urge their city council to not renew their contract with Flock, some going further to request that all existing Flock cameras be removed.

Flock is the security system that’s been sweeping the nation with its Automated License Plate
Recognition programming (ALPR) and its concurrent controversies. According to Longmont’s transparency statement, ALPR is being used to capture computer-readable images of license plates to compare against those of stolen vehicles or cars present at a crime scene. Using ALPR police can determine if a vehicle was at a crime scene. ALPRs can integrate data from national or state crime databases for real-time alerts.

The controversy was sparked by multiple instances of Flock’s AI recognition program providing false positives or being mis-interpreted, as in the case of a Denver woman who was wrongly accused of stealing a package by Columbia Valley police. The presumption of guilt rested entirely on an image of her car driving through the same part of town where the package was stolen. The Denver woman then had to spend weeks proving her innocence.

There have also been troubling cases of data misuse. The Loveland Police Department granted account access to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and ATF agents then used Flock data to run searches for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This violated state law, which bars sharing this information with immigration authorities without a warrant or court order. Flock later acknowledged that as the owner of the collected data, it has a standing agreement allowing immigration agencies full access to camera data from any police department that accepts the invitation.

A Longmont resident gives public comment during the City Council meeting on Dec. 9, speaking out against Flock. Photo taken by Sprout Foster

Two of the biggest concerns expressed last night, however, were transparency and privacy.

Lead software engineer and Longmont resident Andrew Gentry noted, “Longmont’s websites states the community’s safety cameras do not perform predictive analytics or facial recognition. That same assurance is absent from the Flock page, leaving me to believe that this
privacy standard may have been quietly discarded with Flock’s adoption.”

Gentry went on to say, “Flock’s retention policy doubles the length of retention used for community canvas, from 14 days to 30 days, once again signaling to me that the Flock program has been a convenient way to stretch existing privacy standards.”

The city argues that renewing the Flock contract will improve community safety. Community members like Gentry point to the flat trend of car theft in Longmont since the cameras went up, and Diego Luis cites a 2021 Electronic Frontier Foundation analysis that looked at 63 police departments in California and found that only 0.05 percent of millions of scanned plates were tied to any suspected wrongdoing.

Luis also raised concerns about the technology’s accuracy, referencing an innocent Aurora family held at gunpoint and a San Francisco driver that was “handcuffed and humiliated,” only for police to later admit the car wasn’t even the same make or model of the suspect.

“Instead of requiring a warrant or individualized suspicion, Flock cameras allow police to conduct location tracking on everyone all the time. This turns what should be targeted, more base searches into mass surveillance systems that bypass judicial oversight entirely.”

Another lead software engineer, Kellen Lesk, spoke from a decade of experience and graduate-level machine learning training to emphasize how insecure Flock’s data protection systems are, saying, “It’s just as secure as your grandma’s email address.”

He outlined how easy it is to pull imagery from the cameras and how Flock’s privacy promises can be easily broken.

“They use internet connectivity to update these camera. How we do this in the software industry is we load all of the software that we could ever want onto the device, and then we use what’s called feature flagging to turn off and on features. [Flock] says they don’t do facial recognition and person identification, but I guarantee the software is on those cameras and they just have it disabled. And that is a five minute update to turn it on.”

Longmont City Council members deliberate during the Dec. 9, 2025, meeting.
Photo by Sprout Foster

Despite Flock’s promises that private data won’t be shared, many companies rely on Data Clean Rooms, where information can be uploaded and cross-referenced. Only the final results are shared, allowing companies to claim they never “shared” the underlying data even as it’s used to draw detailed conclusions.

During public comment, many residents warned that Flock’s system enables constant monitoring that can build a detailed portrait of daily life. It can reveal who someone meets, where they go, and the routines that define their private world. Speakers pointed to real examples of abuse. In Texas, a woman seeking an out-of-state abortion was tracked and told she would be prosecuted if she returned. Officers elsewhere have used surveillance tools to stalk ex-partners, spy on neighbors, monitor activists, and look up journalists.

After four hours of testimony and debate, the council voted 5–1 to reject any future expansion of the city’s contract with Flock.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192.

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post Longmont Residents Win Fight Against AI Surveillance appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Hair whipping in the wind, the late morning sun obscured by the towering federal courthouse behind, and a smattering of news teams pointed their cameras and microphones. Before the media, holding placards above their head, were the plaintiffs in a newly filed federal lawsuit.

Friends, families, their attorneys and Colorado state representative Meg Froelich joined Dawn Russell, Dr. Claudia Folska, and representatives of Atlantis / ADAPT as they laid out their grievances plainly in the cold air.

Dr. Claudia Folska speaks during a press conference in front of the federal courthouse in Denver, Colorado on Monday, December 8, 2025. Dawn Russell, Dr. Claudia Folska, and representatives of Atlantis / ADAPT filed a federal lawsuit with law firm Newman | McNulty alleging that Colorado’s Regional Transportation District violated the American with Disabilities Act through recent budgeting restructuring and service options impacting the disabled community. (Photo by Vince Chandler / Yellow Scene Magazine)

After an introduction from civil rights attorney Andy McNulty of Newman | McNulty, fresh from lobbying the federal legislature in Washington, D.C., Dawn Russell rolled her wheelchair toward the makeshift c-stand lectern.

Institutionalized as a child following her diagnosis with cerebral palsy, she found an avenue for her voice and fiery commitment when she joined Atlantis / ADAPT in 1996. Living with a disability, she had a lifetime of experience having to advocate for herself. It was time to use that experience lifting everyone around her.

Through almost there decades with ADAPT she has seen success in preserving and protecting the Affordable Care Act and Medicare, access to transportation for all, is an active participant in the assisted suicide policy discussion, and is currently working toward housing equity fighting to pass the LaTonya Reeves Freedom Act.

“It’s been fifty years since the Gang of 19 fought for our right to ride public transportation,” Russell read unflinchingly, beginning her brief statement. “Yet, today ADAPT must again ask a court to make RTD honor it.”

ADAPT was founded in Denver in 1975 by disabled members of a nursing home community founding their own housing solution, Atlantis, with collaboration from Reverend Wade Blank.

The organization got their organizing start protesting for accessible public transit. The organization, and their infamous Gang of 19, set national precedent by winning a lawsuit against RTD requiring the addition of lifts and ramps to public transit vehicles.

“RTD lied,” Russell told the amassed press and their audience. “To you and to me. We should be outraged.”

Attorney Mari Newman speaks during a press conference in front of the federal courthouse in Denver, Colorado on Monday, December 8, 2025. Dawn Russell, Dr. Claudia Folska, and representatives of Atlantis / ADAPT filed a federal lawsuit with law firm Newman | McNulty alleging that Colorado’s Regional Transportation District violated the American with Disabilities Act through recent budgeting restructuring and service options impacting the disabled community. (Photo by Vince Chandler / Yellow Scene Magazine)

The Regional Transportation District, or RTD, made the decision to raise the costs and limit the access to a hard-won option for mobility in the disabled community: Access-on-Demand. The program allows qualifying users to call for rides from third party platforms for curb-to-curb transit, subsidized by RTD.

For those with few route options, the inability to drive to a park and ride, or who have to carry cumbersome equipment, the program allows for autonomy for the disabled with low barriers through proximity to transportation.

“What is she supposed to do, quit her fulltime job and just drive me around?” Dr. Folska asked rhetorically during her time at the microphone, standing next to her adult daughter.

A former RTD Director herself, Dr. Folska founded All Access Transit Solutions in 2020. Blind most of her life, she has worked as a nonprofit director and disability activist throughout her life.

“It causes me great pain and disappointment to see where RTD is today. Today, RTD is killing Access-on-Demand for thousands of people with disabilities when in fact it’s the best service they’ve ever had,” she said.

Taking effect January 2026, the Board of Directors voted in fall 2024 to lower the maximum amount they’d underwrite, increase fares for its use, and create a base fare for all users. RTD says that they are operating with an expected nearly $230M budget deficit for the new year and hope these cost increases for the disability community will alleviate some of that burden.

Dr. Claire Folska and Dawn Russell reflect together after announcing a federal lawsuit during a press conference in front of the federal courthouse in Denver, Colorado on Monday, December 8, 2025. Dawn Russell, Dr. Claudia Folska, and representatives of Atlantis / ADAPT filed a federal lawsuit with law firm Newman | McNulty alleging that Colorado’s Regional Transportation District violated the American with Disabilities Act through recent budgeting restructuring and service options impacting the disabled community. (Photo by Vince Chandler / Yellow Scene Magazine)

“We are outraged by the fact that RTD is treating the rights of people with disabilities as some sort of line item that can just be cut,” Mari Newman, who is representing the plaintiffs. “People have been working for half a century for these rights that they’re entitled to.”

Folska, Russell, and Atlantis/ADAPT say that these changes, and their impacts’ ripples, are in violation of the ADA. The lawsuit reads that disabled users will be “excluded from participation in and deny the benefits of services, programs, or activities provided by RTD,” including equitable access to transportation, in violation of Title II of the ADA. The filing asserts that RTD is denying those with disabilities service, while providing greater access for Coloradans without disabilities.

“To the hundreds of folks who rely on Access-on-Demand for their freedom and independence – you showed-up and spoke-up for two years of RTD Board Committee meetings, and we thank you,” Russell said during her speech. “Let’s make RTD relevant for everyone.

Filed with motions for a preliminary injunction and to have the hearing expedited, the attorneys for Newman | McNulty hope to be able to prevent any interruption to existing service by delaying immediate implementation.

“Getting a federal lawsuit together in about a month is a tough thing to do and that’s what we did here,” McNulty said, answering a question after prepared statements concluded. “We’re looking to stop the wrong and unlawful cuts to RTD services.”

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192.

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post Disability Activists File Federal Lawsuit Against RTD in Denver appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

When the Boulder Police Department (BPD) quietly completed its switch to fully encrypted radio channels in late October, the announcement landed with a familiar thud among Colorado journalists and transparency advocates. To the department, the change was a long-planned technical upgrade meant to prevent outages during critical incidents. However, to many in the press, it represented yet another barrier between the public and real-time information about police activity.

Public Information Officer Dionne Waugh told Yellow Scene Magazine that the department “has been working on this transition for over two years.”

The shift has reignited concerns from reporters and open-records advocates who rely on police radio traffic to understand breaking events as they unfold.

Those concerns are in part driven by the BPD’s history. The department has a documented history of transparency disputes, including Yellow Scene’s own lawsuit to secure access to body-camera footage after the city attempted to charge thousands of dollars for the footage. For many local journalists, the promise of “new tools” and dashboards doesn’t outweigh the loss of a decades-old source of real-time situational awareness.

On November 21, BPD Chief Stephen Redfearn released the department’s first formal statement about the transition. Redfearn opened by reaffirming his earlier commitment to transparency upon becoming interim chief in January 2024. He characterized the change as key to ensuring safety and reliability, saying aging equipment had raised concerns about potential failures during emergency responses.

Colorado lawmakers have debated radio encryption for years. Statewide attempts to restrict or regulate encryption, including HB18-1061 and HB19-1235, failed to pass. HB21-1250, a broader police-accountability bill, requires agencies that encrypt their communications to create a policy allowing media access to unencrypted transmissions. But the law doesn’t prescribe how that access must work, leaving departments to craft their own rules.

Across the state, encryption has become the norm. Aurora encrypted its channels in 2016 with Denver following their lead in 2019.

When the encryption went live, BPD offered encrypted radios to three Boulder news organizations. The offer came with a contract outlining rules for usage and penalties for violations, including the possibility of losing access.

The Daily Camera declined the offer. Editor John Vahlenkamp stated that the outlet does not sign agreements to gain access to public safety communications. This stance is shared by many newsrooms who are weary of how relying on police-controlled terms for access to information could unduly influence reporting.

“These radios are tools that news organizations have used for many, many decades to find out, in real time, what is going on with police in their communities,” said Jeffrey A. Roberts, executive director of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition. Encrypted radios controlled by police agreements, he warned, risk giving departments the power to decide which reporters get the full picture.

Without real-time updates, breaking-news coverage of major incidents — traffic fatalities, fires, shootings, missing-persons calls — often becomes slower, more fragmented, and more dependent on the department’s willingness to provide timely information.

In his latest statement, Redfearn argued the shift “is not a step backward in transparency,” describing it instead as a “necessary evolution” aligned with statewide practices. He pointed to a growing list of publicly available resources, including more than a dozen dashboards, a critical-incidents webpage, Flock Safety data, and ongoing community engagement efforts with liaison officers.

Critics argue that dashboards and summaries, by nature, do not replicate the immediacy of police radio, nor do they allow reporters to independently verify information during high-stakes or fast-moving events.

As Boulder joins the growing list of fully encrypted departments, the debate over access is likely to intensify. For police, encryption offers control and reliability. For journalists and transparency advocates, it closes a key window into how policing happens in real time in a city where trust between the community and the department is already strained.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

 Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192. 

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post BPD’s Move to Encrypted Radio Raises Transparency Concerns appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Colorado state senator Judy Amabile is leading the effort to pass a bill that would shift the authority over minimum wage regulation to the state. The proposal is dividing local Democrats, restaurant owners, and labor advocates.

House Bill 1208, introduced in early 2025, would lower the minimum wage for tipped workers in any city that has adopted a higher local rate than the state’s, including Denver and Boulder County. The bill would affect more than 21,000 tipped workers and reduce their wages by an average of $2.50 an hour (or roughly $5,000 a year), according to the Colorado Sun. The bill is sponsored by Representatives Alex Valdez and Steven Woodrow of Denver, Senator Judy Amabile of Boulder, and Senator Lindsey Daugherty of Jefferson County.

What would the bill do?

In short, the bill would lower the base pay for tipped workers in cities with minimum wages above the state rate, while still requiring total earnings, including tips, to meet the local minimum. Supporters say this will help struggling restaurants manage labor costs. Opponents argue that the change will harm workers.

Under current Colorado law, businesses can pay tipped workers $3.02 less per hour than the standard minimum wage, based on the assumption that tips will fill the gap. This difference is known as the tip credit. If tips fall short, employers must make up the difference. Because Boulder and Boulder County have higher minimum wages, their tipped minimums are also higher. Colorado’s tipped minimum wage is about $11.79, while Boulder County’s is $12.55. The bill would bring Boulder’s tipped minimum down to the state’s rate of $11.79. Workers would still be legally entitled to earn the full local minimum wage once tips are factored in. House Bill 1208 would separate the tipped wage from the minimum wage so that cities could raise wages for non-tipped workers without automatically raising wages for tipped workers. Local governments could begin lowering their tipped wage on January 1, 2026, if the bill becomes law.

Supporters argue that the bill is necessary to help restaurants keep their doors open. According to Boulder Reporting Lab, groups such as the Boulder Chamber, Downtown Boulder Partnership, and Visit Boulder back the bill, saying Boulder’s minimum wage puts strain on restaurants during a periods of financial vulnerability.

Senator Amabile said restaurant owners hope to redirect the savings from reduced tipped wages toward higher rent, food costs, and overall labor expenses, which they see as essential to staying in business.

“Some are characterizing this bill as anti-labor. That is wrong and misleading,” Amabile said in the Daily Camera.

“The bill is a pragmatic, reasonable attempt to rebalance the tip credit for the benefit of all workers and the small, mom-and-pop businesses that are key to thriving communities.”

The sponsors frame the bill as an effort to stabilize restaurants by addressing the widening gap between tipped and non-tipped wages. They want to give employers more room to pay untipped workers. Under federal law, the minimum wage for most workers is $7.25 an hour, and in 14 states this also applies to tipped workers. Federal rules set a floor, not a ceiling, so each state decides its own rates. The result is a patchwork of standards that vary based on location and whether a worker is tipped.

“Many of these workers can earn up to $40 or more with tips, on good days. But these rates are often unpredictable; as a result, workers often turn towards second jobs or social assistance programs like SNAP or Medicaid,” Alejandra Beatty said in an interview with Yellow Scene.

Beatty is a longtime labor advocate and a retired member of the Alphabet Workers Union Local 2009. She helped launch the union and served on its executive council. Over the past year, she has led the campaign to raise the minimum wage in Boulder County.

Supporters of the bill argue that raising menu prices to cover higher wages can drive customers away, creating more harm than a reduction in tipped minimums. However, research shows that restaurants often absorb higher labor costs through reduced turnover, modest price increases, or increased productivity. Between 2011 and 2014, states such as Washington and California, which require employers to pay tipped workers the full minimum wage, saw a 6 percent increase in the number of restaurants. States with tipped minimums saw a 4.1 percent increase.

Progressive labor advocates oppose the bill because it would allow cities to lower the tipped minimum but not raise it unless they also raise the standard minimum wage. Other critics want to eliminate the tipped minimum entirely so that all workers earn the full wage before tips. States like Washington, California, and Minnesota do not have a tipped credit. Workers receive the full minimum wage, and tips are additional income.

Critics say the tipped minimum system is difficult to comply with because tracking tips can be burdensome. A report from the National Employment Law Project found that more than one in ten workers in tipped occupations report hourly wages below the federal minimum wage even after tips are included.

A significant share of tipped workers also fall into roles where tips are inconsistent or not customary, yet they earn enough in tips during some parts of the month to be classified as tipped employees. Their incomes fluctuate with weather, the economy, and day-to-day customer patterns. Many rely on public assistance to bridge the gap.

Efforts to raise the tipped minimum wage have often met resistance from restaurant industry groups, which argue that higher wages would cause more economic harm than good. But many economists say that industry growth is not meaningfully hindered by higher wages. The success of states with a single minimum wage supports this point.

Research suggests that higher wages reduce employee turnover, lowering recruitment and training expenses. Workers who are more financially secure are often more productive and provide better customer service. For the industry to thrive, labor advocates argue, tips cannot serve as a substitute for a stable wage.

“I think all of us need to wake up to the fact that good wages drive a good economy,” Beatty said in her interview with Yellow Scene. “If people are making good wages, they go spend those wages in their local economies, and those businesses thrive.”

In a statement, the Governor’s office expressed support for the bill and urged local governments to follow through by lowering their tipped minimums. “The Governor supports efforts geared towards keeping restaurants that make our communities unique and open while ensuring that workers receive fair wages,” spokesperson Eric Maruyama said.

If signed into law, the bill could next affect Denver, which has one of the highest tipped minimum wages in Colorado and the country. Edgewater, Boulder County, and the city of Boulder, all of which have raised their local minimum wages above the state rate, would also be affected.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

 Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192. 

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post Colorado’s Tipped Wage Battle Pits Workers Against Restaurants appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

In 2023, Erie purchased the 46-acre Village at Coal Creek near Old Town for $6.9 million, using a mix of federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) dollars and contributions from the town’s Trails, Natural Areas, and Community Character (TNACC) fund. The money was awarded to help the town invest in open space and affordable housing, and the project was initially promoted as a future mixed-income neighborhood with trails, parks, and workforce-level housing.

A year later, that vision has become increasingly uncertain.

As political priorities on the Erie Town Council have shifted, so has the interpretation of what the land should become. Council members Anil Pesaramelli, Dan Hoback, and Emily Baer continue to support the original affordable-housing-focused plan. But Mayor Andrew Moore, joined consistently by council members John Mortellaro, Brian O’Connor, and Brandon Bell, has pressed for alternatives that would eliminate or significantly scale back residential development.

Erie is currently committed to increasing its affordable housing stock to 12% by 2035, a target adopted in 2021. The town also opted into Colorado’s Proposition 123, which requires jurisdictions to build a set number of affordable units per year to remain eligible for state housing funds. Coal Creek Village was expected to be a cornerstone project toward meeting those obligations.

However, Mayor Moore has consistently questioned whether the property should include housing at all. At an April 15 study session, he floated transforming the site into a park. By November, he was openly asking staff to consider non-housing options, including retail, a parking lot for Old Town, and even relocating a church.

“What are other uses we could potentially do on this property?” Moore asked at the Nov. 18 Town Council meeting. “Is it the right use for affordable housing? Is there a better use for this property?”

Responding to a request from the mayor and council majority, Senior Planner Aly Burkhalter presented five redevelopment concepts. Some maintained the original mixed-income neighborhood vision; others showed what the land would look like as open space only, or a hybrid of both visions.

A central question looming over the project was whether ARPA funding required Erie to include affordable housing. Staff clarified that it did not: the federal grant applied solely to the land purchase, which the Treasury Department has already approved. In practical terms, the town is not legally required to build any housing on the property.

If the council chooses to abandon affordable housing at Coal Creek, Councilmember Baer hoped the town would either reimburse the Affordable Housing Fund or identify another site for future housing development.

Mortellaro, who also serves as the council’s liaison to the Open Space and Trails Advisory Board, said OSTAB wants the entire parcel preserved as open space, arguing that adding homes “would take away from the value of the open space.”

Moore, meanwhile, introduced several new possibilities, including relocating St. Scholastica, a Catholic parish, to the site to keep parishioners near Old Town. Asked by Yellow Scene Magazine whether anyone on the council attends or is involved with the parish, Moore replied he does not. He also floated bringing in Catholic Charities, a faith-based nonprofit that develops affordable housing, to explore potential partnerships, though he acknowledged he had “no idea if it’s viable.”

The increasingly scattered discussion sparked frustration from some on the council.”
“I feel like we’re all over the place,” Baer said, urging the group to remain focused on options that include affordable housing. She argued that a mixed-income neighborhood, such as three-story townhomes, “could be an amazing development” and an asset for the surrounding area.

Although no development concept was selected, the council did agree on one point: they will not pursue new Parks & Open Space facilities on the site due to cost, traffic concerns, and the parcel’s proximity to Old Town.

Councilmembers ended the meeting by voting to continue negotiations regarding the property in an executive session later that evening.

With no clear direction yet chosen, the future of the Coal Creek property, and whether it will contribute to Erie’s affordable housing goals, now rests on those closed-door discussions. 

The next Erie Town Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 2 at 6 p.m. Public Speaking begins at 6:05 p.m. 

The post Coal Creek Housing in Erie on Hold as Mayor Pushes Alternatives appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

When Boulder created its Police Oversight Panel, the goal was to increase transparency and involve the community in police accountability. That mission may now be shifting. The city is, once again, implementing a change that gives the police monitor, not the panel, the power to decide which misconduct cases are reviewed.

Under the current process, the monitor summarizes every misconduct case for the 11-person panel. That structure was central to how the panel was envisioned, and its potential rollback has raised concerns among Boulder residents, including current panel members.

The change dominated the discussion at the panel’s Nov. 10 meeting.

Activist lawyer Darren O’Connor told Yellow Scene Magazine the city’s decision is a “slap in the face” to the community. The oversight panel, he said, was designed to be representative of Boulder and to amplify voices traditionally marginalized in policing discussions.

Under the new system, the police monitor and the police department’s Professional Standards Unit would determine whether complaints are unfounded or warrant panel review. If both agree a complaint is unfounded, it will not reach the panel. The Chief of Police will still have final authority over misconduct outcomes.

“It makes opaque a process that was supposed to bring transparency to police interactions with the community,” O’Connor said.

Although the police monitor is described as independent, O’Connor argues that is misleading.
“She answers to the city manager,” he said. “The city manager is her boss. The city manager appoints her.”

Members of Boulder’s Police Oversight Panel meet on Nov. 10 during a public session.

Current monitor Sherry Daun attended the Nov. 10 meeting and defended the changes. She said the shift will allow limited resources to focus on the most serious allegations, which she believes benefit most from panel oversight. The revision, she noted, was made on the advice of the city attorney.

Daun said streamlining the process will help cases move more quickly. Several matters recently reviewed by the panel were already more than a year old.

“The panel remains a cornerstone of Boulder’s police oversight system,” Daun told members. “Your work brings the community voice, independent scrutiny, and accountability. That has not changed.”

But O’Connor sees the move differently. The panel, he said, “did not have much teeth to begin with,” and the policy change will weaken it further.

“They’re basically trying to make it go from fairly toothless to leaving the police oversight panel with nothing but gums to chew on the scraps that the police monitor turns over to them,” he said.

The panel may bring in an independent attorney to review the change, but the city would select that attorney—another reason O’Connor doubts POP will be able to reverse the decision.

He called the city’s move disappointing but not surprising, describing it as consistent with how Boulder has historically responded to criticism of its police department.

O’Connor hopes the community will take notice of the shift and push back.

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

 Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192. 

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post Boulder Police Oversight Panel Faces Major Cut to Its Authority appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

12/12/2025 This meeting was moved to December 16th, 2025

On December 9, the Erie Town Council is tentatively scheduled to discuss a proposed settlement with Stratus Red Tail that would resolve ongoing litigation over the stalled Redtail Ranch development.

The conflict began in 2022, when Stratus sued the town after Erie denied its plan to build Redtail Ranch, a 290-acre residential community first introduced in 2020. The project attracted resistance from the start, largely because the development would wrap around three oil and gas facilities and sit adjacent to an environmental contamination site.

The council again rejected a preliminary development plan on June 25, 2024, citing ongoing public-health concerns. A closed-door executive session followed on October 7, where council members received legal advice from the town attorney.

At the center of the dispute is a stretch of land known locally as the Pratt property. In the late 1960s, the property became an informal dumping ground for waste trucked out of a newly opened IBM facility. Records show that at least 1,000 55-gallon drums of hazardous material were brought onto the site. That history remained largely unknown until 2015, when Stratus first uncovered evidence of buried waste while preparing the property for potential development.

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment ordered Stratus to investigate the contamination in 2016. The company has said it spent more than $4 million on cleanup. CDPHE approved the company’s monitoring and maintenance plan in 2020.

Despite the efforts, the land remains hazardous. A subsequent independent study by Pinyon Environmental found traces of torpedo propellant, car-wash chemicals, and grease-trap waste. These findings reignited concerns among residents who already viewed the area’s 32 surrounding oil and gas wells as an “eyesore” and a threat to public safety.

Land-use questions have also complicated the proposal. The Pratt property, roughly 411 acres, was annexed into Erie in 2007 and split into two parcels. One was designated for low-density residential development; the other was set aside as landfill-related public land. Redtail Ranch was originally pitched at 898 units but later reduced to 587 to conform with existing zoning. Of the total acreage, 110 acres were set aside as private open space, including approximately 16 acres covering the contamination zone.

Several residents have also pointed to the town’s evolving oil-and-gas setback rules. When Stratus first proposed Redtail Ranch in 2020, residential development needed only a 350-foot buffer from oil and gas wells. The town expanded the setback to 500 feet in 2021.

Public conversations about the project have been limited. Between its 2020 introduction and Stratus’s lawsuit, only one neighborhood meeting, held in April 2021, took place.

The council is tentatively scheduled to take up the proposed settlement and new preliminary plat on December 9, with time planned for public comment before any action.

Hometown Newspaper posting, Nov. 19th, 2025

The ones who dared to fight City Hall.

 When Boulder denied public access to police body-cam footage, we took it to court. Our fight for transparency is now before the Colorado Supreme Court — because accountability doesn’t stop at the city line.

 Through December 31, every gift to Yellow Scene will be matched — dollar for dollar — through the Colorado Media Project’s Matching Grant.Give & Get Democracy this Holiday Season. Your $8 recurring monthly support not only gets you YS delivered to your house, but it’s matched for the entire year, bringing that $8/month to $192. 

Because Independent journalism isn’t just about telling stories. It’s about protecting your right to know, holding power accountable, and keeping democracy in the light. This is #newsCOneeds Becoming a sustaining supporter today for $8 a month!

The post Erie to Weigh Settlement in Redtail Ranch Lawsuit on Dec. 9 appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.