Raw Politics: Reining In The Renegades
In The Waning Months Of The Hancock Era, Denverites Must Be Vigilant And Hold Leaders Accountable
By Penfield W. Tate, III
For the GPHN
Last month I offered the perspective to commit in the new year to coming together. To hold government and those in office (not power) accountable to doing what is best for our communities and in this way doing what is best for all of us.
What does it really mean to have an accountable government? Often a review of history can help light a path forward.
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” That line from the Declaration of Independence reveals the source of our expectations of accountable government — dating back to the times of the original colonists and their objections to the arbitrary actions of the throne.
These ideals are the very source of the expectations of the people to counter arbitrary executive action. The expectation of an independent legislative branch. The expectation that the legislative branch, elected by the people, will have access to records and materials to inform their decision-making. The expectation that legislative bodies would meet in convenient places to be observed and recorded publicly so that all may know what they are doing.
And the expectation that legislative bodies — and indeed, even the executive branch, — will be responsive to and operate with the “consent of the governed.”
Where are we now?
Regrettably, in local government we have a number of instances where these founding principles are being circumvented, if not ignored.
The not-so-Great Hall project
Here is just one recent example: Denver International Airport officials requested an additional $1.1 billion to complete the Great Hall project. When this project was initially put forward in 2018 it was a $1.8 billion project (now described by DIA as wildly unrealistic) to be completed in late 2021.
The project itself was shrouded in secrecy. Initially, City Council objected, in part due to claims the Hancock administration was not fully forthcoming with information. In response the administration did an information dump and bombarded council with boxes of documents and a ridiculously brief time to review and absorb the import of the proposed project. City Council demanded the ability to hire their own independent lawyers to help them review and analyze the financial and operational import of the proposed deal.
With reservations, council reluctantly approved the ill-fated project. It has been a rolling disaster. The administration was forced to scrap the project and pay a massive, and yet not fully disclosed sum — estimated at $40 million — to the project contractor to go away. It’s been a nightmare for travelers. And the administration belatedly admitted that it was not competent to manage or oversee the project.
Council responded to this and other actions of Hancock’s administration with a series of charter amendments, approved by voters, including the power to confirm or reject mayoral cabinet appointees, the ability to initiate spending and the ability for Council to contract for independent professional services. The goal was to increase transparency and accountability from the executive branch. In time we may see results of these reforms.
Most recently City Council approved a revised Great Hall project with an expanded budget of $2.1 billion. This was done without rebidding contracts, and with construction now to extend into 2028 – three times longer than originally proposed.
This, despite Council’s expressed reservations over the project and even insistence on wanting to conduct a “lessons learned” analysis over the initial failed project. Unfortunately, the latest project was approved before the “lessons learned” analysis has been conducted. Next year Hancock is term-limited and there will be a new administration running City Hall. So, this project may change again. Has the cart once again gone before the horse?
The will of the voters
What must we do?
We must stay vigilant and attentive to ensure that our local government officials act with our consent and are accountable to and responsive to our needs.
When we approve charter changes to check the actions of the administration, we expect the administration to check itself. Or we need to continue to check it. When we vote to reject proposed projects or funding schemes for the same, we expect the administration to respect the voice of the voters. Or we must act to reinforce our expressed wishes.
This is going to become more difficult. As reported in last month’s issue of the GPHN, seven mayoral appointees stepped down in the second half of 2021. This means many short term or interim appointees will be filling in for the waning months of this administration. Among the departed: leaders from the departments of Human Services, Public Safety, Transportation and Infrastructure, Capital Planning and Real Estate, Economic Development and Excise and License.
The capacity for running out the clock against dissenters is high. We must pay attention and call out any outrageous renegade behavior. We must be vigilant to make sure this administration does not attempt to subvert the will of the voters, who have expressed their will on a number of different projects and proposals.
We have a right to expect our government to be responsive to our needs and to reflect our points of view, particularly as articulated in popular elections. Those in office often have more information than voters. It is their responsibility to present that information openly, honestly, and fairly and they must obtain our consent for their actions.
Far too frequently the current administration has shown a desire to overrun the will of voters, also far too frequently at the behest of and in support of powerful developers. Indeed these developers appear to be running the city. I have heard criticisms that some people are just “anti-development.” In reality, most of us are simply tired of development that wholly ignores the needs of the entire city.
We deserve the government and democracy we fight for. Stay warm and safe. And Happy Valentine’s Day.
Penfield W. Tate III is an attorney in Denver. He represented Park Hill in the Colorado House of Representatives from 1997 to 2000, and in the State Senate from 2001 to February 2003. He lives in Park Hill.