The bill specifies that it is not a discriminatory practice for a private business to decline to contract to provide goods or services:
• That convey a message with which the business chooses not to associate itself or with which the business owner disagrees; or
• For an event that conveys a message with which the business chooses not to associate itself or with which the business owner disagrees.
As a Free Speech advocate, I believe that campaign limits confine free speech and violate the First Amendment rights of citizens who want to participate in the process. Many disagree, but that is my view.After the election results were tallied last week, Colorado Springs Forward and the Housing and Building Association of Colorado Springs found themselves with only one endorsee in the winner's circle — Andy Pico.
As the elected leaders of our City these Members have every right to consider changes and propose changes to the campaign finance rules. And I suppose if they are as successful at labeling people as evil, and free speech as dark money as they were in the recent campaigns they may receive public support. Ultimately the burden will fall mostly on the candidates and supporters who want to run for office and participate in the political process. I would warn them that all campaign finance laws limiting free speech have accomplished so far is to drive funding and campaigns underground. The US Supreme Court has recognized that citizens have a right to participate and to use their resources (time, talent, and money) to both run and support others in running and that is a protected right. People who can afford lawyers and campaign finance consultants will find a way to get their message out when they have a great deal at stake and those most harmed by campaign finance rules are those without the resources to use alternate methods to get their message out.
For the record I do not believe that the CCPOC [Colorado Citizens Protecting Our Constitution, a nonprofit that doesn't disclose donors] or any outside group worked against the candidates the business community overwhelmingly supported. As there could not be and was not any coordination because of campaign finance laws ... mistakes can and will happen to the best of us.
It is incumbent on me, the candidates, Members of Council, the community to evaluate what occurred a week ago. There were many good people with different ideas and values running. There is a lot at stake. Elections matter.
Colorado Springs Forward wishes to thank each and every candidate for their thoughtful, passionate efforts. We look forward to working with everyone in all that comes our way as a community, and we hope that all of you do as well.
Further, we have added our sincere congratulations today to our new and continuing Council members, Don Knight, District 1, David Geislinger, District 2, Richard Skorman, District 3, Yolanda Avila, District 4, Jill Gaebler, District 5 and Andy Pico, District 6.
I love the bronze statue Fearless Girl that faces the Charging Bull of Wall Street in New York City. The look on her face is priceless – defiant, brave, ready to take on all the difficulty of life.
It’s an expression we all recognize – I see it daily on the faces of staff members, patients and volunteers at Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains. Fearless Girl embodies how we feel as an organization, standing in opposition to the new administration, and most recently to Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.
Our opposition is on behalf of our clients – as a health care provider to tens of thousands, we believe that Judge Gorsuch has taken active stands that give corporations religious rights over individual’s access to birth control (Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius and Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Burwell). He has refused to answer crucial constitutional questions or elaborate on his judicial philosophy during his hearing in the Senate.
His alarming history of interfering with reproductive rights and health care will affect Coloradans’ real lives. Every day, we see the need for access to life-saving cancer screenings, STD testing and treatment, cancer wellness exams, preventive health care and birth control. Last year, more than 70,000 people were treated at our Colorado health centers, including our health center in Colorado Springs. Colorado needs MORE access to health care, not less. Judge Gorsuch’s past shows he’s willing to stand in between medical providers and their patients.
We don’t look at access to health care as theoretical, academic or corporate. It’s deeply personal to every single one of our patients. Our patients don’t come to us for political reasons – they come because we are a trusted provider they know will give them compassionate, confidential, high-quality care. And we know that most Americans agree with us. Poll after poll demonstrates that people overwhelmingly support Planned Parenthood and our work.
Planned Parenthood stands in opposition to Judge Gorsuch. And just like Fearless Girl, we stand up to power, especially for those who wouldn’t otherwise have a voice.
If you agree that everyone needs access to health care no matter where they live or their situation, then please call U.S. Senator Michael Bennet at (202) 224-5852 and tell him to vote against the nomination of Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
Be fearless with us and stand up to power.
Sarah Taylor-Nanista is Vice-President of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains and Executive Director for Planned Parenthood Votes Colorado
Ms. Jack did not apply for such a permit. We typically learn of violations of the City Code regulations via citizen complaints.————-ORIGINAL POST, 5:10 P.M., APRIL 3 ——————————
When a complaint comes in, as long as we have all of the information needed, the City will notify the offender and ask them to remove the sign or Code Enforcement Officers will go out and remove the sign in question.
With regards to election signs within public rights-of-way, temporary signs are allowed within the City right-of-way with approval of a revocable permit in accord with Section 3.2.217.D of the City Code however there are regulations that must be followed. There are two separate applications; one for signs of six square feet or less and another for signs larger than six square feet. The difference between the two types of signs is that the City needs to review the placement of any sign larger than six square feet so that they are not placed within the sight visibility triangle because the sign can restrict the visibility of pedestrians and vehicular traffic. Some of the rules and regulations for sign placement include:The city didn't mention whether Jack, Fowler and Crow-Iverson have obtained the necessary permits. But it's pretty standard procedure to do so; thus, we'd be shocked if Jack didn't tend to that detail on behalf of her clients.
· No signs are allowed within the medians of any public right-of-way;
· The size of the sign(s) are based on the zone of the adjacent property;
· Signs are not allowed on or in front of City of Colorado Springs or Colorado Springs Utilities owned property which includes Park land and Open Space;
· Signs are not allowed within the right-of-way of State highways, i.e. I-25, Hwy 21 (Powers), Hwy 115 (portions of Nevada), etc.;
· Adjacent property permission is required.
It’s unfortunate that the level of misrepresentations of my record - spread by my opponent - have become so extreme to become the focus of an investigation by District Attorney Dan May. The biggest loser in these negative attacks and lies continues to be the voters of District 5 who deserve an honest choice in who will represent them and ourHere's the DA's Office's release of the findings:
While these specific allegations apparently did not rise to a criminal level, I appreciate the District Attorney’s finding that literature from Lynette Crow-Iverson’s campaign was false and a complete fabrication.
Simply put, I do not and have not supported sanctuary cities in our state.
I want to thank District Attorney May for his thoughtful investigation into these falsehoods. In the final days of this campaign, I look forward to continuing a conversation with my community about the things that matter most to them - roads and infrastructure, responsible growth, and ensuring that our families and children live in safe neighborhoods.
On Friday, March 24, 2017, Colorado Springs City Councilwoman Jill Gaebler filed a formal complaint with the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s Office based on a political mailer that had been sent out by her political opponent Lynette Crow-Iverson. The mailer incorrectly states that:We've asked the Crow-Iverson campaign for a comment and will update if and when we hear something.
City Councilwoman and Colorado Municipal League Executive Board Member Jill Gaebler voted unanimously to oppose House Bill 17-1134, which would “Hold Colorado Government Accountable for Creating Sanctuary Jurisdiction Policies.
From The Colorado Municipal League’s Website: “The Colorado Municipal League is the voice of Colorado's cities and towns, counting more than 97 percent of the state's municipalities as our members. Founded in 1923, the Colorado Municipal League is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization providing services and resources to assist municipal officials in managing their governments and serving the cities and towns of Colorado.”
Colorado Municipal League (CML) members met on February 17 to vote to unanimously oppose HB 17-1134. City Councilwoman Jill Gaebler, who has consistently voiced her opposition to sanctuary cities, was not present for that vote.
Representative Dave Williams contacted CML regarding the organization’s vote on HB17-1134 and asked specifically how Councilwoman Gaebler had voted. A CML employee, who did not check the record, informed Rep. Williams that the vote to oppose the bill was unanimous and that they believed Councilwoman Gaebler had opposed the bill. This information was clearly wrong.
It is against Colorado law to knowingly or recklessly circulate false information about your opponent. Because the erroneous information used in Lynette Crow-Iverson’s mailer was provided by the CML employee, the District Attorney’s Office is unable to prove that anyone involved in producing the mailer knowingly or recklessly circulated false information. No charges will be filed.
The Senators wrote that the Order “fails to bring clean energy jobs to our rural communities, ignores the impacts that extreme weather will have on our economy and our national security, and does not decrease our reliance on foreign oil.”Here's the actual letter that went to Trump, who some have nicknamed "the denier-in-chief" for his stance on climate change:
“We stand ready to work with you and your Administration in reaching a balance between achieving energy independence, promoting innovation, and growing our rural economies,” the Senators wrote in the letter. “Unfortunately, your Executive Order takes the nation in the wrong direction. In order to account for the unique needs of our Western states, we respectfully request you rescind the Energy Independence Executive Order.”
The Senators outlined several reasons the President should rescind the Order, including that it fails to:
· Address the issue of creating jobs, or account in any way for a real and effective solution to support coal communities to revitalize their local economies and create 21st century job opportunities.
· Support the clean energy industry, one of the fastest-growing sources of new jobs in the country. (Collectively, the wind and solar industry accounts for nearly 144,000 jobs and more than $83 billion in existing capital investment in Western states.)
· Consider the economic impacts of extreme weather events on rural communities, such as increasing crop premiums for farmers and loss of snowpack for the ski industry.
· Make our country more secure and less reliant on foreign oil.
U.S. Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Kamala Harris (D-CA), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Patty Murray (D-WA), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Ron Wyden (D-OR) signed the letter.
From 2012 to 2015, the City spent on average $32,000 yearly to repair the 93 year old “pot holed” asphalt courts at MVP to make them safe for public use. In partnership, PPPA and Parks & Rec developed a more cost-effective approach. Parks & Rec put $100,000 in the 2016 City Budget for the concrete upgrade of the asphalt courts. In parallel, PPPA competed for and was awarded $25,000 in LART funding for the court upgrade. This $125,000 in “local tax funding” referred to in the Editorial was matched by PPPA who raised an additional $81,000 from donations and tournament proceeds and $115,000 in grants. Our public-private partnership pooled these funds to build a public-use world-class “50-year” low-maintenance Pickleball facility at MVP.Norton then wrote to Council noting this:
In summary, the LART Committee, Don Knight, Jill Gaebler and the rest of City Council who supported the 2016 City Budget for this needed upgrade were not serving some “special interest” but rather supporting a smart, cost-effective, long-term fix of the near Century old high-maintenance asphalt courts at MVP. They should all be commended, not impugned, for such excellent foresight and effective shepherding of taxpayer funds. PPPA is part of a large and ever-growing Sport that is providing significant health and economic benefits to our City. Our nonprofit organization proudly fits the very definition of LART funding quoted in your article: “to attract visitors to the City and the Pikes Peak Region, provide economic and cultural benefit, enhance the quality of life in the City, engage the community and encourage tourist activity.
In case you did not see how the Gazette "selectively edited" our Pikes Peak Pickleball Association's response to the previous Sunday's Gazette Editorial Board fact-limited opinion piece, here's the original PPPA submission to the Editor including what was cut out of this morning's "Your Viewpoint" op/ed section of the Gazette.
It appears our Association's complete "viewpoint" does not count when it comes to giving City Council, Parks & Rec, and the LART Committee appropriate credit for doing the right thing with taxpayer funding.
Nevertheless, we certainly appreciate your support of our nonprofit's mission to serve and benefit our local community.
Since joining Colorado Politics (it's distinct from The Gazette), I haven't written on any former client until today. So, there has been nothing to disclose. In fact, I only learned of Matt Arnold's complaint against Pioneer — and then decided to write about it — after he made a vague reference to it in response to my request for a comment for a previous blog post on him and his tactics.
I am responding to your headline "Colorado Springs reaches settlement in racial profiling case" April…
Picking MDJ would be interesting seeing as she has no doctorate, no US civilian university…
Interesting that if a vehicle has a rear-view camera, you're not required to turn your…
So, essentially what is being said is that bodycameras do reduce the incident of racial…