Saturday, June 20, the Town of Erie made an announcement that Councilmember Brian O’Connor had reconsidered the mineral rights deal and was bringing the motion back to a vote on June 23. On June 16, the vote failed in a 3-3 tie, with Councilmember Dan Hoback absent and O’Connor opposing the deal. 

Tonight, 47 residents spoke in public comment regarding the deal, with 35 in opposition. Residents also submitted over 428 pages of comments online, with analyses showing over 90% of the letters submitted in opposition. Those efforts also included a letter to the council with 227 signatures requesting that council vote no. O’Connor appeared to hesitate in his closing speech, but his position was clear in his verbiage throughout the meeting.

Consistent with previous votes, which had been controversial among residents (such as Redtail Ranch, pride flag policy and Executive Session transparency), the council chose to vote 4-3 in favor of Erie selling its mineral rights. Councilmembers Anil Pesamarelli, Emily Baer, and Dan Hoback voted against, while Mayor Andrew Moore,  Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell, and Councilmembers O’Connor and John Mortellaro were in favor.

While supporters emphasized the purported safety measures and fiduciary benefits, the opposition scrutinized the processes of the deal itself, raising legal and ethical concerns that have escalated over the past months.

These include violation of town procurement policies when hiring the consultant firm Alameda Mineral Advisors, improper use of confidential Executive Session meetings, possible violations of Alameda’s contract with the town, and lobbying from Alameda CEO Matthew Owens for residents to contact O’Connor and ask him to reconsider his no vote.

Mayor Moore stated that town staff in charge of the procurement process did not follow town guidelines, and that none of the councilmembers were aware of this breach of policy. Hoback stated it differently. “As for not following the town procurement process, to my knowledge, that process was never passed to town staff. Town council was in complete control of the vendor selection process.”

He continued to say, “This deal, since the beginning, has had valuations all over the place.”

Bell spoke for over 24 minutes, as he did at the June 16 meeting. His comments focused on the inevitability of the Draco Pad, the estimated 30 to 44 million dollars of the deal and advice to his critics, whose comments he characterized as “not even worthy of discussion.”

The evening ran long, but after three hours, the council voted 4-3 in favor of selling the mineral rights. Selling mineral or water rights is a permanent, high-stakes financial decision, and one that should not be taken lightly.

The post Rocky mineral rights deal passes in 4-3 vote in spite of opposition appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

The Town of Erie Colorado is weighing whether to sell or lease a portion of its mineral rights tied to the state-approved Draco oil and gas project, a decision that has exposed divisions on council, raised questions about the town’s negotiating process, and highlighted uncertainty about how much authority Erie actually has.

At a special meeting on April 21, town staff emphasized that no final agreement has been reached and no vote has been scheduled. Council questioning made clear that key aspects of the proposal, including how it originated, how consultants were selected, and what the town actually owns,remain unresolved.

Erie Environmental Services Director David Frank

The Draco project, approved in March 2025 by the Energy and Carbon Management Commission (ECMC), allows for up to 26 wells to be drilled from a site in unincorporated Weld County, extending horizontally beneath portions of Erie. Town officials reiterated that the project is expected to move forward regardless of local action. “I would fully expect, no matter what action the town takes, that 26 wells will be drilled,” Erie Environmental Services Director David Frank said.

Town of Erie Councilmember, Dan Hoback

Early in the meeting, Early in the meeting, Councilmember Dan Hoback began pressing staff on the fundamentals of the deal: when the town was first approached, how negotiations began, and why Alameda Minerals was selected without a competitive process. When asked about this piece of the process, Frank said, “I’m not aware of any other companies that do this exact work.”

 By the end of the meeting, those questions had evolved into a broader challenge to both the process and the assumptions underlying it.

“I have serious concerns about conflict of interest,” Hoback said. The consultant, Alameda Minerals, is led by a former oil and gas executive with ties to the industry involved in the project, a connection that drew scrutiny during the meeting. He also warned that the absence of a formal request-for-proposals process could expose the town to legal and audit risks.

More significantly, Hoback disagreed with the idea that Erie lacks leverage. While town staff and some council members emphasized the town’s relatively small percentage of mineral ownership, Hoback emphasized that without permission to drill through town-owned minerals, operators may not be able to reach large portions of the approved drilling area. “The inability to drill through Erie land without owning its mineral rights can be a major, major impediment to the ability of Draco to drill much of its planned area, currently approved or not,” Hoback said.

Town officials declined to provide additional documentation or answer detailed questions about the procurement process, citing the ongoing nature of negotiations.

Those competing interpretations of the town’s authority sit at the center of the debate. Erie’s leverage stems from Colorado SB24-185, which prevents operators from forcing municipalities into pooling agreements. But how that law will function in practice, and particularly whether operators can drill through or around municipal minerals, remains untested.

Public comment reflected both that uncertainty and a sharp divide over how the town should respond. Sixteen residents and stakeholders spoke at the meeting, with the majority opposing a sale or urging alternatives such as delaying action or retaining the town’s mineral rights. Five supported moving forward with a sale or lease, including three who identified themselves as representing business or industry interests, such as mineral rights owners and energy companies.

Former state senator and attorney, Mike Foote

Former state senator Mike Foote, who worked on oil and gas legislation for years, described the current moment as the result of a long effort to give local governments control over their mineral rights. He recalled earlier policies that allowed a single mineral owner to force others into leasing, calling it something he “couldn’t believe” when he first encountered it. 

The 2024 law, he said, was designed to change that dynamic. “This was a hard-fought provision,” Foote told council, urging them to “take advantage of it” and follow the will of the community. “There’s nothing in the law anymore that says that you have to say yes.” He warned that approving a deal would entangle the town with the oil and gas industry for decades. “This puts Erie in business with oil and gas for a long, long time,” he said. “I would urge you [… ] to say no.”

Other residents raised concerns about long-term environmental and infrastructure risks. Steve Hochgesang pointed to the lifespan of plugged wells and containment systems, warning that decisions made now could create long-term liabilities, particularly for groundwater and waste disposal.

In contrast, speakers aligned with mineral interests emphasized financial realities and potential legal consequences. Kole Kelley, an oil and gas attorney at Fennemore Law, argued that development is already approved and that refusing to participate would not stop drilling but would result in forgoing compensation. He warned that the town could face litigation if it interferes with mineral owners’ ability to realize value from their assets.

Those competing perspectives were reflected in the council’s closing statements.

Hoback remained the most openly critical, raising concerns about procurement, transparency, and conflicts of interest, while also emphasizing the town’s decision-making power in this moment. “Other companies cannot drill through our land to reach other people’s mineral rights. So I’ll be a bit of the voice of the wilderness and say, yeah, we can impact Draco, despite the narrative that’s been making its way through social media and tonight’s presentation. um The initial approval of the Draco pad was not a rollover and play dead moment.  In fact, we should be fighting harder than ever,” Hoback said.

Councilmember Anil Pesaramelli aligned more directly with residents opposing the deal. “I am for health and safety,” he said. “I urge everyone to stop this sale.”

Councilmember Brian O’Connor took a more cautious position, expressing frustration with the process and emphasizing the need for more information before any decision is made.

Town of Erie Councilmember, Emily Baer

Councilmember Emily Baer delivered one of the most detailed and forceful closing statements, drawing on years of work in oil and gas regulation. 

She pushed back on the idea that selling mineral rights would improve safety, noting that many of the cited protections are already required by the state regardless of any deal. “To imply there are safety regulations that will go unenforced unless Erie sells its minerals is misleading,” she said.

Baer also argued that the town retains meaningful authority under current law, including the ability to deny subsurface access. She framed the decision as a question of values and long-term governance. “My principles are not up for purchase,” she said, reiterating her opposition to selling the town’s mineral rights.

Councilmember John Mortellaro took a more logistical tone, emphasizing that the project has already been approved and suggesting the town should consider whether it can secure benefits from an outcome it cannot prevent.

Mayor Pro Tem Brandon Bell and Mayor Andrew J. Moore both framed the decision in similar terms, emphasizing inevitability and the potential to capture value. Moore rejected claims that the town could significantly alter the project, calling that idea “100% false,” and stressed the importance of protecting negotiations.

Bell drew a direct comparison to a past landfill decision, where the town chose to accept development in exchange for compensation rather than oppose it without leverage. “If you’re going to dump trash in my backyard, you’re going to pay me for it,” he said, describing the philosophy guiding his position. His remarks made clear that he views the mineral rights as a negotiating tool rather than a mechanism to stop drilling.

To some council members, the project is unavoidable and selling the mineral rights are a means of extracting value and oversight. Others view those same rights as one of the town’s only remaining tools to challenge or constrain development.

No vote has been scheduled, and officials said any agreement would be subject to a future public hearing. Until then, core questions remain unresolved, including the exact location and value of Erie’s mineral rights, whether the town followed standard procurement practices, and how much influence Erie ultimately has over a project already approved by the state.

For now, the debate in Erie is not just about oil and gas. It is about whether a town that fought for the authority to say no will use it.

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 mineral rights hearing divides council over control, transparency and who decides appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

photo by Janine Robinson

Erie Elections 2024

As the Unofficial Election results for Erie trickle in, the town’s ballot measures have shown candidates who appear to be leading and winning the election. 

However, per the Erie government website, Andrew Moore is set to win against Justin Brooks with 10,384 votes, while Justin Brooks has received 9,807 votes. This has placed Moore in the lead with 577 more votes. Council Members for District 1 have shown John Mortellaro leading with 2,652 votes, followed by Andrew Sawusch with 2,633 votes. 

One of the candidates running for District 2 has been met with heightened controversy. Dan Maloit, who the ballot measures have shown is placing third with 2,078 votes, has been served with a lawsuit for allegedly doxxing and posting nude photographs of an ex-partner online. 

The victim, who chose to stay unidentified, claims she had found out about the nude photos being posted online 2 years ago, back in 2022. Once she started doing a deeper search on the web, she realized that photos had actually been posted of her online dating back to 2016. 

Since these allegations have arisen, Maloit filed a countersuit in September and has denied any of them, claiming they are intended to sabotage his political career. In a Facebook post on November 4, 2024, Maloit states, “I believe the allegations are false and are made in addition to other private matters that exist between the plaintiff and myself.”

District 3 has shown Brian O’Connor leading with 2,626 votes, Travis Pinz with 1,612, and Emily Baer with 2,885. 

The city of Erie, with 11,566 votes, has voted yes for a 5% excise tax on the sale of Marijuana. This means that starting January 2025, a tax will be imposed on the sale of Marijuana both medicinally and recreationally. The big change is that Marijuana will be able to be sold and purchased in the city of Erie, something that hasn’t happened in the city since the legalization of Marijuana in Colorado back in 2012. 

962 yes votes have gone toward question 7B regarding RTD annexation. Over 90% of the city of Erie is already annexed into the RTD district. The RTD annexation vote would result in providing more unannexed areas in the city of Erie for public transportation systems such as the RTD. This voter approval will bring about multiple benefits for the people of Erie, including transportation services, access to rides, parking benefits, and free fares that would be eligible for residents and youth during the summers. 

What’s next? Election results for the city of Erie will be finalized on November 26, 2024. 

Stephen Redfearn

The City of Boulder responds to the NAACP

The NAACP has issued a press release expressing its concern about the recent hiring of Stephen Redfearn, a police officer with a dark reputation by the City of Boulder. 

Stephen Redfearn was recently hired last year into a permanent position as head police chief in the City of Boulder. On October 14 of this year, the NAACP released a press release condemning the hiring of Stephen Redfearn due to his history of covering up the murder of Elijah McClain.  

In the press release submitted to YS, the NAACP claims that Redfearn is not only “anti-black” but also lacks “cultural competence,” which should, by all rights, disqualify him for the position of head police chief of the City of Boulder. 

The press release also contained a transcript of a recorded confidential meeting that took place in July of this year between members of the City of Boulder and Stephen Redfearn.

According to the City of Boulder’s manager, Nuria Rivera-Vandermyde, the meeting was secretly recorded without the members’ knowledge or consent, and members were asked to sign an agreement not to publish any details of the meeting anywhere online. According to Colorado law, Colorado is a one-party state, meaning that the NAACP did not need to inform the members of the City of Boulder that they were being recorded. 

The press release provided by the NAACP contains a transcript of the recording during the meeting. In this transcript, there were heated exchanges between Redfearn and Darren O’Connor, the chair of the NAACP Boulder County’s criminal justice committee. A “crude” comment was made toward Redfearn’s sexuality by O’Connor, which prompted Redfearn to express his being gay as a prominent reason why the NAACP condemned his hiring. Redfearn further claims that O’Connor smirked at him during the meeting anytime Redfearn spoke, resulting in questionable comments made by Redfearn that prompted O’Connor to state that such comments further prop up  “a system of racism.”

Nuria Rivera-Vandermyde recently came forward, issuing a statement accusing three members of the NAACP of blackmailing her with the recording. According to Rivera-Vandermyde, the members used the recording to pressure the City into not going through with the hiring of Redfearn. Rivera-Vandermyde claims that the NAACP’s actions have been “unethical and unacceptable.” Rivera-Vandermyde even goes as far as stating that Redfearn had nothing to do with Elijah’s murder, “Without repeating their misleading account of his involvement, I want to make clear again that there were no allegations against then-Aurora Police Captain Redfearn in connection with this case.”

What’s next? There have been no updates pertaining to the hiring of Stephen Redfearn. In an email sent to Boulder Weekly, Darren O’Connor said, “The lack of good faith begins and ends with her (Rivera-Vandermyde) and Redfearn,” he closes it by saying, “The truth is, she spent the City’s time and money creating a sham process in which Redfearn was always going to be chosen. An untold amount of money was spent hiring facilitators of the conversation, with the hope that the offering of a conversation would be sufficient to silence our critiques.”

graphic by Ray Manzari

2024 Elections and Blaming Minorities for Trump’s Victory 

As the old saying goes, if you scratch a liberal hard enough, a fascist bleeds.

As Donald Trump embraces his second Presidential election win, rather than focusing energy on the Democratic party and why Harris’ party did not succeed, strategists and even voters have succumbed to blaming minorities — many who make up only less than 1 percent of the American population — as being the main reason for Trump’s victory. 

Poll trackers show that 54% of the Latino population intended to vote for Harris and 33% for Trump. However, the final numbers came out as 55% of white and Hispanic males voted for Trump, while 53% of white women also did. Yet Muslims are often taking the blame for Harris’ loss. According to the Council of Islamic Relations, the Democrats had 22,000 fewer votes this year from Arab Americans and saw a 9,000 vote increase for Donald Trump. CAIR has listed that 53.2% of the Arab vote went to Jill Stein, while 21.4% of the Arab American vote went to Trump, and about 20.3% went to Harris. 

While many Democratic voters and strategists claim that a vote for the Green party is a vote for Trump, that isn’t entirely the case. Prior to the election, many Arab Americans, allies, and anti-genocide voters had expressed the importance of voting for the Green party as a message to the Biden and Harris administrations that genocide is a staunch red line for many American voters. Newsweek states, “Roughly 60 percent of us here in the United States now say the two-party system has failed.” 

Following the election, many Harris voters resorted to social media to express their outrage and fears with Trump’s newly announced presidency by scapegoating Arab Americans, Black men (who voted 78% for Harris, down 2% from 2020) as well as other minorities for the failure of Harris’ campaign. 

A series of tweets, TikTok, and social media posts by Democratic voters displaying racist and disturbing reactions toward Trump’s victory swarmed social media outlets. Many Democratic strategists blamed others, and even die-hard true-blue Democrats called for death and violence against Arabs and other minorities, as well as calling for the complete obliteration of Gaza, “When Gaza is Blown off the map, they’ll have Trump’s vote to thank.” one user tweets. “Good luck with new Trump settlements,” another user comments on Instagram. Another prominent Twitter user by the name of Derrick Daniello, whose account was recently suspended, tweets, “Don’t worry… they’re gonna die under Trump. I hope Netanyahu levels Gaza…America isn’t an Arab state. The craziness we see in Europe will never happen in America.”

Latino and Hispanic Americans have also been faced with the brunt of the Democratic reaction to Trump’s win, as many Democrats expressed their lack of care and support for the deportation of Latinos and Hispanics who voted for Trump. The American Journalist Ronald Martin told the Independent, ““If that dude’s [a Trump voter] mama gets deported, that’s on him, and I’m gonna play Scarface’s ‘No Tears,’” expressing no sympathy toward the deportation of Latinos and directing the blame on them for voting for a presidency that many claims is Anti-immigrant. 

While Arab Americans, specifically Palestinian and Lebanese Americans, have been witness to the relentless annihilation of their people and destruction of their homes, the Democratic party and its followers believe that Arab Americans should unequivocally stand by the party that is funding the murder of their families. 

According to the United Nations, the number of children killed by Israel in Gaza since October 7 is higher than four years of world conflict. Two days before the election, Al Jazeera stated that 70% of the Palestinians killed in Gaza have been women and children. 

What’s next? Are American voters seeking justice and reform today, or only when it pertains to them? While the next four years may seem rather bleak, one thing that we Americans can take the time to do is reflect and focus our energy inward toward the failure of the Democratic party that felt imperialism and genocide were more important than winning an election. 

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter (and get our printed copy monthly at home.)

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

The post A Nation in Flux: Local Elections, National Debates, and a Polarized Future appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

“Thank you for your service!”

On many occasions I’ve been offered this dollop of gratitude when someone learns that I served in the U.S. Army as an officer during the war on Vietnam. My “service” was without real distinction, although I earned my commission through a grueling year of basic training, Advanced Individual Training in the Infantry arts, and 6 months of Officer Candidate School (OCS).

I did not volunteer for any of it, except OCS, because I thought being an officer justified the extra year I signed up for.

Because I was (and am) anti-war, I used to decline the gestures of gratitude, not wishing to further the knee-jerk, mindless patriotism implicit in “Thank you for your service.” More recently I smile and say, “Thank you.”

My shift is not because I’ve grown more enthusiastic about violence or think, “By god, I deserve it. I gave up three years of my life.” The shift is because my perspective on both service and the thanks for it have evolved.

As to service, the vast majority of women and men who serve in the military or a branch of first responding do so for salutary reasons. I am confident that very few sign up because they have a strong desire to kill anyone. They may have a romanticized view of valor and heroism or enlist because it is the best life option they see. Military service offers a life of purpose, constantly reinforced by civic and political rhetoric about keeping us safe.

If each member of the military forces was, in fact, keeping us safe, thanks are very much deserved. Although the military adventures of the last 80 years have not, by and large, kept anyone safe, their intent has merit.

It is the decisions made by politicians that give lie to the mythology of selfless service in defense of the rest of us. In Vietnam and nearly every subsequent military excursion, sincere women and men were sacrificed to the poor or malicious choices made by political leaders, most of whom have never worn a uniform. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan . . . wars built on misinformation and misjudgment, placed honorable women and men in dishonorable circumstances.

The extent to which our bloated military is a deterrent is unknowable. I know that peace on Earth does not flow from threats of violence, so our aggressive posture seems escalatory, not conciliatory. But these ethical and philosophical considerations are not front of mind for America’s young recruits, nor should they be.

When passersby say, “Thanks for your service” to a person in uniform, I believe they are recognizing the choice made to offer oneself, not the manipulation of that choice by others. Especially in those cases where a high price was paid, it is unfair – cruel – to withdraw gratitude and empathy just because the “cause” for which they sacrificed was corrupt.

A disabled veteran of the immoral and dishonest war in Vietnam deserves no less gratitude than the disabled veteran of WWII, who served a more necessary cause.

The saying, often attributed to St.Augustine, “Hate the sin and love the sinner,” has an applicable paraphrase: “Hate the war, and honor the warrior.”

Which brings me to current relevance.

Right now, Pew Research reports that voters who served in the active military or reserves prefer Trump to Harris by a margin of 61% – 37%.

This lopsided support for a man who faked a medical disability to avoid service – like mine.

This lopsided support for a man who has called dead soldiers “suckers and losers.”

This lopsided support from a man who insulted Gold Star families.

This lopsided support for a man who denigrated John McCain for being a prison of war.

This lopsided support for a man called a fascist by the Generals closest to him.

This lopsided support for a convicted felon who has stolen classified documents and carelessly shared top secret information with our geopolitical rivals.

Many – most -Republicans claim the mantle of patriotism. They salute the flag, They pledge allegiance and ask God to bless America. They paste “Support Our Troops” stickers on bumpers.

I don’t share their exuberant and demonstrative version of patriotism or their religion. (I love the irony of their bitching about virtue signaling.) But I can and have found common ground with them. Not if they support Donald Trump.

I have challenged the more conservative candidates for election in Erie to disavow Trump. None has done so. They are evidently afraid to alienate the MAGA base.

They are Andrew Moore, Andrew Sawusch Travis Pinz, John Mortellaro, Brian O’Conner, Brandon Bell and Dan Maloit.

If they will not disavow Trump they don’t deserve your vote. They don’t deserve anyone’s vote.

And don’t thank me for my service. I’ve learned to graciously accept “thanks” even though I don’t particularly care.

But any person who supports Trump does not have the moral standing to thank any American for their service.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter (and get our printed copy monthly at home.)

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

The post Thank You For Your Service appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Oh, what a bind they’re in!

The dynamics in my town’s local election are a window into the vise that grips Republican candidates nationwide.

“My town” is Erie. Candidates for Mayor and town council have divided into two pods, despite the supposed non-partisan nature of the election.

One pod’s candidates are seemingly Democrats, the others seem to skew Republican. The apparently Republican-ish pod has been dubbed the “slate,” because of their lockstep views on some issues and their ubiquitous clusters of campaign signs. The campaign is spirited and the spirit is sometimes unpleasant. As a writer for Yellow Scene, and a lively contributor to social media, I’ve added more than a bit of spice.

The dynamic I reference flared when I posed this question to the candidates:

A challenge to our Erie candidates:

Ordinarily, this question would be somewhat irrelevant. But in light of the recent “testimony” from multiple members of the Trump administration, including Generals Mattis, Milley, and Kelly, that Donald Trump is a fascist and unfit for office, can you affirm that you will not support him?

It seems reasonable to know whether local elected officials support a presidential candidate who has been characterized as a fascist authoritarian by conservatives and highly respected military leaders.

Have you the integrity to respond? A failure to respond will speak for itself.

Not one of the “slate” – and I’ll name them for the record – responded. They are Andrew Moore, Brandon Bell, John Mortellaro, Andrew Sawusch, Travis Pinz, Dan Maloit and Brian O’Conner.

Each pea in the other pod readily stated their support of Harris/Walz. They are Justin Brooks, Ben Hemphill, Anil Pesaramelli, Emily Baer, Dan Hoback and Richard Garcia.

None and all. The difference is stark.

“Slate” supporters took me to task for inserting partisanship into what they think should be a friendlier and more civil campaign. Many complained that the federal election is irrelevant. I won’t explicate the many contortions the “slate” and their friends performed to avoid the issue.

So why won’t they answer and why is the question relevant and important in a local election?

I don’t believe that most Republican-leaning candidates, federal, state or local, are “afraid” of Donald Trump. They are afraid of Trump supporters.

I will stipulate that the members of Erie’s “slate” may otherwise be decent enough folks, although there has been some electoral mischief ascribed to several of them. But if they denounced Donald Trump, for any of the myriad reasons he should be denounced, their electoral prospects would significantly dim. That’s the nature of politics these days. A rock and hard place squeezes decency from nearly all Republicans – here, there and everywhere.

Perhaps they don’t respond because they are ashamed. I suppose that would be slightly better than being a proud Trump supporter. But that’s a distinction without a difference.

It is relevant because the refusal to denounce this particular candidate and his rancid rhetoric is tacit agreement.

Because my local candidates will not speak out or step up, it is fair to make these assumptions:

They support a candidate who does not respect or honor democratic norms, therefore one might question their support for democratic norms.

They support a candidate who encourages violence and retribution, therefore one might question their support for peaceful and civil governance.

They support a candidate who is crude, coarse and serially dishonest, therefore one might question whether their own values are firmly grounded in honesty and decency.

They support a candidate who has exhibited racism in speech and action, therefore one might question whether they are tolerant of racist speech and policy.

They support a candidate who wishes to deport millions of brown children, women and men without regard to due process or a modicum of human decency, therefore one might question their attitudes toward immigrants in our community.

They support a candidate who has been convicted in criminal and civil court, therefore one might question whether they consider criminal conviction, without remorse or rehabilitation, as disqualifying for one seeking the public trust.

They support a candidate who has been convicted of sexual assault and accused of such by dozens more women, therefore one might question whether they value the protection of girls and women from sexual aggression or predation.

They support a candidate who is on the record stating that he would be a “dictator on day one”  if elected again, therefore one might question their own attitudes toward authoritarianism.

They support a candidate who has declared admiration for Hitler, Putin, and other brutal leaders, therefore one might question whether they have lost all sense of decency. 

My initial challenge should be addressed to every candidate for office in the United States.

In my small community, in the shadows of the magnificent Rockies, the silence from Andrew I, Andrew II, John, Dan, Brandon, Travis and Brian is complicity.

They are indeed in a bind. But it’s no excuse.

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter (and get our printed copy monthly at home.)

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

The post Damned If You Do – Or Don’t appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

10/27 updated to reflect the Comp Plan restricts density to 5-10%.

Welcome to Erie, CO, for all the newcomers. It’s a good little-big town, it really is. I have lived here a long, long time. Election season can be stressful, but that’s true in most places. I hope you find Erie to be a good town to live in, raise your children in if you have them, shop and dine in, and, of course, choose to volunteer in our town.

I welcome all the newcomers. Like all towns, elections get messy. But in rapidly growing municipalities with lots of outside interests, there can be added motives. In our last election, we had Dark Money in Erie.

I would advise watching our town council meetings to learn more. They are all available at the Town of Erie website. https://www.erieco.gov/322/Watch-Meetings-on-Demand. It will give you a flavor of how current elected officials, up for reelection, govern.

Having experienced over twenty election seasons since moving here in 1992, I’m personally voting for these candidates because I believe they best represent the vision we need for our future.

• Reelecting Justin Brooks for Mayor
• D1: Pesaramelli, Garcia
• D2: Reelecting Hoback, Hemphill
• D3: Reelecting Baer

The slate I am not aligning with chose not to interview with the YS Election Guide, and although that isn’t the only reason I’m not supporting them. The way they chose to turn us down gives a peek at their mindsets and temperament. All candidates were contacted by our journalist and provided the same questions. Brandon Bell posted on social media that he would rather be caught on fire and rolled in salt than interview with YS. Andrew Moore claimed they were not Erie questions; John Mortellaro initially ignored our request but did eventually respond on NextDoor. You can view our exchange there. Sadly, they chose partisan politics over reaching their community. However, the same slate has demonstrated a lack of willingness to respond to questions from voters.

• Andrew Moore (former mayor from 2004-2010, 55 well pads during that time)
• D1: Mortellaro, Sawusch (Incumbent)
• D2: Bell (Incumbent), Maloit
• D3: O’Connor, and Pinz

The policies the Moore slate has advocated that I take issue with include:

• A water park at the airport (which has one way in and one way out, and years ago, the airpark residents voted down connecting Bonanza, so are they cool with a water park?)
• Vouchers for housing but no density housing (where are the vouchers coming from? Is the Town going to buy a bunch of houses? That makes no sense?)
• Home Rule, which was just approved by Erie voters in 2023, already needs to be repealed or changed (?)
• Taxing citizens more for what we need instead of using the Capital Investment Fund for Capital investment improvements
• Claiming Erie is overbuilding “high-density.” This term has been bantered around as the main talking point. Erie needs to have more than just a sea of high-income housing to sustain itself. The recent Comp Plan, approved in a 4-2 vote, raised the total to 37 units per acre. By comparison, Boulder and Longmont are at 40 per acre, and Aurora is as high as 200 per acre on some properties. Additionally, the Comp Plan designates 5-10% for density. Don’t worry Erie can continue to build a sea of houses.
• Claiming the Comp Plan was rushed. See local resident Ms Terranova’s Letter to the Editor. In short, it was a two-and-a-half-year process, with community volunteers who participated.
• More fireworks and snowplows
• The Moore slate typically does not respond to citizen’s inquiries
• Councilperson Bell chose to share a private Facebook post of a local citizen in response to a letter to the editor she wrote that endorsed the Brooks slate.
• Oil and Gas is just fine with 181; there is no need for further regulations by the town, according to several of the Moore slate.

Erie has been heavily fracked for 20 years for those who don’t know. Draco Pad is a huge problem, and you may want to attend the meeting Oct 29th, 2024, at Erie Middle School: https://yellowscene.com/events/

There are many new homeowners in our town now. I have been to neighborhoods I have never been to, ever. There are so many houses—I can not believe how many houses. Erie has become a sea of houses where there was once wide open plains and little light pollution in just under 25 years.

I would like:

• Less sprawl, please. Yes, build more density so things are closer together.
• Driving across town is a hassle because there are so many houses and cars. There are also more potholes because there are more cars! Yes, public transit, please.
• Yes, to things staying closer together and being walkable. Why would anyone think that sprawl is a good thing?

Now that we are done publishing the Election Guide, it is time to turn in my ballot. Only 14% of you have as of the time of this writing. If you are not sure about all those messy ballot issues and candidates, check out our endorsements in this year’s Election Guide. Last year, it won first place at the Better News Awards.

Yellow Scene Election Guide 2024

Erie Colorado Moderated, Facebook group

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter (and get our printed copy monthly at home.)

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

The post YS Publisher’s 2024 Election Endorsement in Her Hometown of Erie appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

screenshot, CyclErie’s mural, a cycling shop in Downtown Erie

Letter to the Editor, 

Election time can be a really stressful and frustrating time of year for people. There is so much information and discourse that it is sometimes difficult to make a decision on who to believe and what to vote for. Thursday, October 17, 2024, I sat in the gymnasium at Vista Ridge Academy at the Town of Erie Candidate Forum hosted by the League of Women Voters, listening to the potential future leaders of the Town of Erie discussing pertinent issues in the upcoming election. 

The desire to make sure our Town thrives is what inspired me to join the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC), a group of Erie citizens who were brought together to advise and give input and suggestions throughout the process of creating the new Comprehensive Plan.

While working on the PAC, we heard often and frequently that what the people of Erie (myself included) love most is the small-town feel. That is what makes it such a desirable place to live, and it has driven our growth. Half the people in Erie now in love with that small-town feel wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for the growth set in motion approximately 20-25 years ago. It was a Comprehensive Plan that promoted growth intended for a much smaller town with aspirations to be a desirable place to live. That plan was beyond successful. But with the new population came new problems: Inadequate infrastructure, insufficient services, skyrocketing housing costs, and this continued desire to still feel like a small town despite our population outpacing the towns around us. 

What I learned from being on the PAC, was that this Erie bedroom community could not sustain the growth model that was decided on before most of us even lived here. 

Bedroom communities offer a quiet life, lots of green space, and great parks and schools… but how is this typically sustained? Bedroom communities rely primarily on residential taxes to maintain services, infrastructure, and low-density housing. What does Erie do when the money generated from residential taxes can no longer sustain the growth created by an old, outdated plan that no longer fits? 

Just this month, the current Town Council in Erie, in a 4-2 vote to pass, finally approved the brand new Comprehensive Plan for our town. This plan was set in motion approximately two and a half years ago, driven by the desire to maintain a small-town feel in Erie, control the sprawling growth encouraged by the old Comprehensive Plan, and not overburden the residents. For two and a half years, groups of contractors, town employees, elected officials, volunteers, & survey respondents all contributed to this new plan to make our way of life in Erie sustainable. In this process, we learned from experts that a model where a town maintains low taxes, high services, and low density does not exist. It is impossible. To maintain our small-town feel, we needed to get creative. The Comprehensive Plan was the culmination of two and a half years of work and thousands of person-hours, all centered around maintaining our small-town feel despite the growth that was set in motion two-plus decades ago. 

As someone who worked on the comprehensive plan by volunteering my time on the PAC and meeting with Town Planners to understand the process, my frustrations arose as I witnessed a former Mayor running for reelection, Andrew Moore, making false claims that the new Comprehensive Plan was rushed. I was not surprised, but again, disappointed that Andrew Sawusch and Brandon Bell voted against approving the Comprehensive Plan, claiming there wasn’t enough involvement from the public. As part of the public, I was able to participate intimately in the development of this plan along with the rest of the PAC, and I know copious community engagement opportunities were offered. Their objections felt like a ploy to sow divisiveness and spread disinformation in our town, a town these candidates claim to want to bring together. None of these men chose to be at these meetings, be involved in this extensive process, and in the eleventh hour were calling it shady. Are these the men that we want to lead our town? The ones who ignore the process and then complain about the results? The ones who divide us with scare tactics and misinformation?

At the candidate forum, my frustration grew.

• In general, I heard candidates Andrew Moore, John Mortellaro, Andrew Sawusch, Brandon Bell, Dan Maloit, and Brian O’Connor discuss repealing/changing the newly approved Comprehensive Plan, a plan that was developed to maintain our small-town feel and increase revenue without burdening current residents while turning around and saying how important it was to maintain a small-town feel. 
• Moore, Mortellaro, Sawusch, Bell, Maloit, and O’Connor talked about decreasing taxes but did not offer a plan for how the town will collect revenue to maintain our essential services and amenities (like parks). 
• Moore, Mortellaro, Sawusch, Bell, Maloit, and O’Connor expressed how oil and gas isn’t an issue in Erie, leaning on Colorado Senate Bill 181, saying Oil and Gas operations aren’t happening in our backyards. 

It felt as if these six candidates were all reading from the same script. 

I then heard candidate Dan Maloit talking about having more snow plows (increasing services), only to turn around and talk about firing Town employees and mocking their jobs. 

With all of that, I thought to myself, these are the types of men who make people dislike politics. This rhetoric is what drives communities apart. 

(Please note that Travis Pinz was not at the forum and did not submit an opening statement. In trying to find information on his plans for Erie, my biggest takeaway is that his beliefs and goals for the town seem to align with candidates Moore, Mortellaro, Sawusch, Bell, Maloit, and O’Connor). 

At the end of the forum, I approached Candidate Andrew Moore to discuss his plans. I had addressed him several times on social media with no response regarding the misconception that a town can maintain low taxes, high services, and low density. 

When I asked about services such as maintenance and infrastructure, he mocked fellow candidate Dan Maloit about his plow plan. When I discussed taxes and how he will pay for the services to maintain the small-town feel in Erie, and if he plans on lowering taxes, he diverted the conversation, talking about how he isn’t going to lower taxes (after stating during the forum that we need to lower mills, aka taxes).  

I asked about different housing options to support our community, and he simply stated, “So I’m guessing you’re looking for affordable housing.” 

To try and get a clear answer, I asked about stances that his “slate,” Andrew Sawusch, Brandon Bell, John Mortellaro, Dan Maloit, Travis Pinz, and Brian O’Connor, were taking, and I was told that he doesn’t have a slate. This confused me because his election signs are always paired with the same six other candidates, and those candidates, including Mr. Moore, held a Meet and Greet together on Wednesday, October 16. It felt very disingenuous and dismissive. 

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

He then went on to discuss how Erie is not and will never be a community that will use bicycles and buses and that we just need to expand roads (which I know is another piece of misinformation and a fallacy as it is proven that widening roads does not reduce traffic, but instead makes it worse due to “induced demand”.) 

I then also asked why it didn’t seem like he answered the question on oil and gas. Mr. Moore told me that I needed to check his website. 

I felt like I left the conversation without a single question answered due to Mr. Moore’s question-dodging. I asked myself why he wouldn’t just answer the questions and tell the truth. As frustrated as I felt during the forum, my conversation with Mr. Moore is what pushed me to write this letter. I was finally exhausted from all the manipulation.

But even with all the manipulation, misinformation, and frustration, I did feel hope during the candidate forum. There was a group of candidates that spoke intelligently and passionately about the important issues in the Town of Erie. 

• I heard Justin Brooks talk about making sure Erie maintains its sense of community and that there is affordable housing for our seniors and workforce. 
• Emily Baer discussed how we were going to support our most vulnerable citizens and protect the interests of Erie citizens by showing up at the table where oil and gas decisions are being made. 
• Dan Hoback was passionate in developing mixed-use areas of Erie that would increase our tax base and provide much-needed different types of housing that would contribute to and enhance Erie’s small-town feel. 
• Anil Pesaramelli supported Smart and sustainable growth. 
• Ben Hemphill focused on multimodal transportation and financial sustainability. 

All these ideas were echoed within this group of candidates with a sincere focus on how we will maintain the small-town feel Erie is known for. 

(Please note that Richard Garcia was not at the forum due to a family obligation, but he did submit an opening statement stating how he is going to contribute to making Erie more inclusive by supporting affordable housing, citing that the majority of people working in Erie cannot afford to live here and stating how he will support programs and services to meet the needs of our residents. Based on his literature, his beliefs and goals for the town seem to align with candidates Brooks, Baer, Hoback, Pesaramelli, and Hemphill.) 

I also talked with Candidate Justin Brooks, the current mayor, after the forum. This conversation stood in stark contrast to the one I had with the other mayoral candidate. When I asked Mr. Brooks about his plans for taxes, he described himself as fiscally responsible and conservative, citing that as a resident of Erie, he also feels the pinch on his wallet. 

He explained that in his two years as mayor, the town has been able to increase its commercial tax base, which has allowed our town to become less reliant on residential taxes. He expressed that if he is elected again, he will continue to grow Erie’s commercial tax base to continue supporting all the services and infrastructure residents need, enjoy, and want more of. 

Additionally, he expressed the need for different types of housing, as these new business employees will need a place they can afford to live within the Town of Erie, as well as more affordable housing options for the current employees and older persons within the town who can’t afford to live here. 

Mr. Brooks’ passion and pride for the town of Erie was evident in this brief conversation. He was very attuned to the needs and desires of the residents in maintaining the small-town feel and being responsible in how we grow and how we use our money. 

He took the time to really hear me answer my questions, and to me, that showcased his dedication to the residents of Erie.  

Mayor Brooks was right when he said during the forum that it is essential that as we continue to grow responsibly, we need to maintain that small-town quality by being kind to each other, hosting and joining in on community-building events, and not planting disinformation and fear to win elections. 

I love Erie. I love the small-town feel and the sense of community here. I want a Mayor and Council members with the strength and dedication to stand up for what’s right for our town: locally, regionally, and on a state and national scale. 

This November, I will be voting for the candidates that embody those qualities and bring us together with innovative and thoughtful decision-making, not the ones trying to scare me to vote for them. 

-Lindsey Terranova

Erie, Colorado 

The post Letter to the Editor; Erie Elections 2024 appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.