Close
the Associated Press file In this April 6, 2011, photo, mayoral candidates hold up “Yes” signs as they respond to a question during a debate in Denver sponsored by New Era Colorado. From left are: Carol Boigon, Michael Hancock, Doug Linkhart, James Mejia, Chris Romer and Theresa Spahn.
Associated Press file
Close
the Associated Press file In this April 6, 2011, photo, mayoral candidates hold up “Yes” signs as they respond to a question during a debate in Denver sponsored by New Era Colorado. From left are: Carol Boigon, Michael Hancock, Doug Linkhart, James Mejia, Chris Romer and Theresa Spahn.
Associated Press file
There are numerous things to dislike about the Group Living Amendment now before the Denver City Council and scheduled for a vote on Feb. 8. One of the most glaring is the statement made by the cityâs Department of Community Planning and Development (CPD) in its presentation material when the Group Living Proposal was first submitted for public review. It read: âWe have exclusionary regulations with roots in classism and racism.â
That seemed to me to be a rather harsh and unreasonable statement being that, when I first took up residency in the neighborhood where Iâve lived for 45 years, I was not informed about the racist/classist nature of the neighborhood nor did I become aware of that state of affairs until the truth of the matter was revealed, thanks to CPD.