| LovelandPolitics.com |
Loveland - July 21, 2009
The Loveland Reporter-Herald Editor and General Manager, Ken Amundson, may appear a little flushed or red in the
face this week after he printed an editorial that apparently repeated some false information McWhinney has been peddling
about their proposed tax holiday for a 303 unit multi-family housing project.
Especially embarrassing is the fact a recent Reporter-Herald editorial accused what he called "citizen journalists" of
reporting news on the Internet of doing exactly what he did the very next day.
The July 17, 2009 Loveland-Reporter-Herald Editorial Stated:
"It’s easy to get into the mindset that the canned press releases on some Web sites or items posted by “citizen
journalists” are real news. People might be well intentioned in posting these press releases, but when they
appear in cyberspace looking like news, be aware they offer no alternative viewpoints and no vetting of the
organization that sent them out. They do not meet the standards journalists strive to uphold when publishing
articles" (underline added by LovelandPolitics for emphasis)
On July 18, 2009 Amundson's opinion column did exactly that. He apparently published what he had heard from
McWhinney without checking sources or even being aware of what the Loveland City Council had discussed in public on
the issue. Had he properly "vetted" the source of the information instead of relying on McWhinney press releases and the
guest column by Chad McWhinney his editorial would have been different.
Amundson's un vetted column claimed that "the opposition" to the McWhinney's proposed 61% tax waiver for their multi-
housing project in Centerra wanted to limit the period of the tax holiday. In fact, the contrary is true. It was
McWhinney's biggest advocate on council who emphatically supported the tax waiver, Mayor Gene Pielin, who offered
the shortest time frame of 30-45 days to ensure only McWhinney could benefit from the temporary reduction in CEF's
(Capital Expansion Fees). After learning staff could easily take up to 6 months to approve a new multi-family housing
permit the Mayor helped to craft the current proposal which is conveniently limited to just less than 6 months. This
ensures that probably only McWhinney's already proposed project will have a reasonable amount of time to fit into the
less than 6 month window for the proposed tax holiday.
The problem is the $1.8 million tax waiver for McWhinney should be (according to the law) back-filled with general fund
monies so those capital costs for city services do not go unfunded. The City Attorney, at the public council meeting
broadcast over Loveland's cable channel, corrected the Mayor's 30-45 day suggestion to a longer period of time to avoid
appearing to violate the law by changing the law for just one developer temporarily without providing the back-fill.
Other mistakes in the article include Amundson's overall premise that CEF's (Capital Expansion Fees) were responsible
for a slow down in construction of multi-family housing in recent years in Loveland. In fact, the statistics published by The
Group Inc. demonstrate Loveland is a leader in the region in the number of new multi-family housing projects built in
recent years. The only source we are aware of for Amundson's faulty conclusion was the guest column published the
previous day by the Loveland Reporter-Herald written by Chad McWhinney.
Amundson's column promoted the general or more broad-based tax reduction concept that could benefit all developers in
Loveland and those in the construction trades who are unemployed in our community. What he failed to realize is that
Councilman Kent Solt offered exactly that proposal twice when he asked his colleagues to consider a permit fee waiver
for all permited construction improvements in Loveland. That proposal was twice ignored but not by the opponents of the
McWhinney only tax holiday (like Kent Solt) as Amundson was lead to believe and published but instead by
McWhinney's advocates on Loveland's City Council.
Ken Amundson drank the McWhinney cool-aid and apparently really believed their propaganda that their proposal was
to benefit all developers in Loveland while stimulating the local economy. A closer look, however, would have revealed it
was the McWhinney apologists on Loveland's council trying to close the door on a wider stimulus package and the
opposition Amundson attacked trying to make it more broad based and fair which is apparently what he supports.
Ken Amundson can now join in the long list of otherwise respected public figures who have been made to look foolish
when repeating McWhinney propaganda before checking all the facts for themselves. Below are four examples from a
very long list LovelandPolitics has archived.
1. Those who defended McWhinney's claim that Agrium would not move into Loveland unless the monies for improving
the I-25/U.S. 34 were taken out by McWhinney to entice the employer with new buildings.
2. Councilman Glenn Rousey who posted on the LovelandPolitics blog he would be laughing when Grand Station is built
and our sources of information proven wrong that the project had already been cancelled.
3. Loveland City Manager Don Williams who assured the Loveland City Council only a few months back that
McWhinney wouldn't sign the agreement to help fund Crossroads unless they really had the funds available in the metro
district to meet the July 30 deadline. (an emergency item on tonight's agenda gives McWhinney funds from the 25/34
escrow account to pay for Crossroads.)
4. All the Loveland Chamber of Commerce participants and former Mayor Larry Walsh who openly endorsed the
proposed Grand Station trolley and the development before discovering later that McWhinney intended taxpayers to fund
the trolley, parking garage and other amenities as "public improvements."
Unlike the Loveland Reporter-Herald, we want to extend the invitation to Ken Amundson to respond to this
article with his own version of events by an unedited (by us) letter up to 600 words that we will post.
The Loveland Reporter-Herald Editor and General Manager, Ken Amundson, may appear a little flushed or red in the
face this week after he printed an editorial that apparently repeated some false information McWhinney has been peddling
about their proposed tax holiday for a 303 unit multi-family housing project.
Especially embarrassing is the fact a recent Reporter-Herald editorial accused what he called "citizen journalists" of
reporting news on the Internet of doing exactly what he did the very next day.
The July 17, 2009 Loveland-Reporter-Herald Editorial Stated:
"It’s easy to get into the mindset that the canned press releases on some Web sites or items posted by “citizen
journalists” are real news. People might be well intentioned in posting these press releases, but when they
appear in cyberspace looking like news, be aware they offer no alternative viewpoints and no vetting of the
organization that sent them out. They do not meet the standards journalists strive to uphold when publishing
articles" (underline added by LovelandPolitics for emphasis)
On July 18, 2009 Amundson's opinion column did exactly that. He apparently published what he had heard from
McWhinney without checking sources or even being aware of what the Loveland City Council had discussed in public on
the issue. Had he properly "vetted" the source of the information instead of relying on McWhinney press releases and the
guest column by Chad McWhinney his editorial would have been different.
Amundson's un vetted column claimed that "the opposition" to the McWhinney's proposed 61% tax waiver for their multi-
housing project in Centerra wanted to limit the period of the tax holiday. In fact, the contrary is true. It was
McWhinney's biggest advocate on council who emphatically supported the tax waiver, Mayor Gene Pielin, who offered
the shortest time frame of 30-45 days to ensure only McWhinney could benefit from the temporary reduction in CEF's
(Capital Expansion Fees). After learning staff could easily take up to 6 months to approve a new multi-family housing
permit the Mayor helped to craft the current proposal which is conveniently limited to just less than 6 months. This
ensures that probably only McWhinney's already proposed project will have a reasonable amount of time to fit into the
less than 6 month window for the proposed tax holiday.
The problem is the $1.8 million tax waiver for McWhinney should be (according to the law) back-filled with general fund
monies so those capital costs for city services do not go unfunded. The City Attorney, at the public council meeting
broadcast over Loveland's cable channel, corrected the Mayor's 30-45 day suggestion to a longer period of time to avoid
appearing to violate the law by changing the law for just one developer temporarily without providing the back-fill.
Other mistakes in the article include Amundson's overall premise that CEF's (Capital Expansion Fees) were responsible
for a slow down in construction of multi-family housing in recent years in Loveland. In fact, the statistics published by The
Group Inc. demonstrate Loveland is a leader in the region in the number of new multi-family housing projects built in
recent years. The only source we are aware of for Amundson's faulty conclusion was the guest column published the
previous day by the Loveland Reporter-Herald written by Chad McWhinney.
Amundson's column promoted the general or more broad-based tax reduction concept that could benefit all developers in
Loveland and those in the construction trades who are unemployed in our community. What he failed to realize is that
Councilman Kent Solt offered exactly that proposal twice when he asked his colleagues to consider a permit fee waiver
for all permited construction improvements in Loveland. That proposal was twice ignored but not by the opponents of the
McWhinney only tax holiday (like Kent Solt) as Amundson was lead to believe and published but instead by
McWhinney's advocates on Loveland's City Council.
Ken Amundson drank the McWhinney cool-aid and apparently really believed their propaganda that their proposal was
to benefit all developers in Loveland while stimulating the local economy. A closer look, however, would have revealed it
was the McWhinney apologists on Loveland's council trying to close the door on a wider stimulus package and the
opposition Amundson attacked trying to make it more broad based and fair which is apparently what he supports.
Ken Amundson can now join in the long list of otherwise respected public figures who have been made to look foolish
when repeating McWhinney propaganda before checking all the facts for themselves. Below are four examples from a
very long list LovelandPolitics has archived.
1. Those who defended McWhinney's claim that Agrium would not move into Loveland unless the monies for improving
the I-25/U.S. 34 were taken out by McWhinney to entice the employer with new buildings.
2. Councilman Glenn Rousey who posted on the LovelandPolitics blog he would be laughing when Grand Station is built
and our sources of information proven wrong that the project had already been cancelled.
3. Loveland City Manager Don Williams who assured the Loveland City Council only a few months back that
McWhinney wouldn't sign the agreement to help fund Crossroads unless they really had the funds available in the metro
district to meet the July 30 deadline. (an emergency item on tonight's agenda gives McWhinney funds from the 25/34
escrow account to pay for Crossroads.)
4. All the Loveland Chamber of Commerce participants and former Mayor Larry Walsh who openly endorsed the
proposed Grand Station trolley and the development before discovering later that McWhinney intended taxpayers to fund
the trolley, parking garage and other amenities as "public improvements."
Unlike the Loveland Reporter-Herald, we want to extend the invitation to Ken Amundson to respond to this
article with his own version of events by an unedited (by us) letter up to 600 words that we will post.
| Why Ken Amundson May Be Red In The Face After attacking websites providing news he did exactly what he accused us of doing |
