YES! I will sign it! In fact, I will NOT vote for any candidate that doesn't limit their contributions to $100 per contributor in this next election - Mayor or Council. And, if one of the McWhinney's candidates is alone on the ballot again (like the Mayor) I still will not vote for them!
--Jay

Thanks for reporting this. I always suspected but didn't really know for sure that Council members were so tied to one industry.

Was Pielin the exception or is this tie true of other Council members? Based on their actions, I'd guess it was but I'd appreciate if there is other info about the others.
--Digger

Thanks for reporting this. I always suspected but didn't really know for sure that Council members were so tied to one industry.

Was Pielin the exception or is this tie true of other Council members? Based on their actions, I'd guess it was but I'd appreciate if there is other info about the others.
--Digger

I have sat in on numerous McWhinney presentations before the city council and it was very clear that whatever McWhinney wants, McWhinney gets. My husband and I were involved in fighting against McWhinney building housing right against the airport boundaries. The town council pointed out that all homeowners would be required to sign a legal document acknowledging the airport/noise conditions. We laughed cause a little piece of paper will not stiffle hundreds of homeowner rantings when the jet goes over their roofs at 10pm. The airport is a vital part of our community, a few hundred more new homes ARE NOT! We pushed for commercial zones around the entire airport to support aviation rather than make a quick buck with low cost housing. McWhinney backed off one small parcel development but the town rubber stamped another development for him off Eisenhower (no doubt a back room agreement). It's time to have the local citizen's voices heard over the corporations, developers and outside city special interests. Perhaps by this limit on financial contributions, more ordinary citizens can run for the open seats on the town council or mayorial position. I, for one, hate to see a person like Don Morostica buying a seat for himself in our government. Perhaps we can extend this law for our officials up the ladder too! Power to the people!
--Carol

I am in shock. In knew they were influenced by the fancy receptions and brown-nosing that goes on but I never knew these clowns were bought and sold by the McWhinneys and Loveland Commercial.

Thanks for your information but it is incomplete. Are they the only ones or did Jan and the others bend principals and start taking money from the people they are supposed to regulate? I used to like her especially since she came to my door and said how bad Forrest Knox was for taking money from special interests. I can't believe she would lie to me like that and become another Forrest.

If they didn't, I will go to City Hall and demand these guys bankrolled by McWhinneys start excusing themselves from voting on their campaign boss' projects. Is it really legal to allow the McWhinneys to pay for your campaign and then pretend to represent the voters when deciding on projects for the McWhinneys?

--Jennifer

Why doesn't that Reporter-Herald report the #%@& news! I am never renewing another subscription again to those cowards.

I am from New York and the Gray Lady (New York Times) has a motto that is "All the News That's Fit to Print" The Reporter-Herald should have a new motto that says, "None of the news that's fit to print only BS"

If I never found you guys I would have no idea about what the hell is going on in this town! How about the truth from our little newspaper for change and stop protecting these fat cats!
--Calvin M.

The Reporter-Herald is owned lock, stock, barrel, body, and soul by the McWhinneys. How else would publisher 'Mr. Ed' Lehman and his lapdog, the editor, afford their memberships to all-white clubs?
--Silent Majority

Ouch! Where is Ouch by the way. Everytime Don Marostica takes a trip on his Harley Ouch stops commenting here hmmmmm.

I watched tonight's meeting and saw sleepy Gene trying to stay awake. LovelandPolitics - don't stop documenting the crass abuse of the public's trust by this McWhinney puppet!

He did wake-up and argue about the depth of manhole covers - he was very angry about driving down Taft. Reester had the best jab when he said at least they keep drivers awake!

The comment went right over old sleepy Gene's head but plenty of staff watching got the joke and could barely contain themselves.


--Not the Clerk

Did anyone here Jan Brown (Council tonight) say she rode a train for the first time in her life this week and the conductor accidently drove them onto the line behind Centerra and she was very impressed by seeing the large buildings from behind.

I was waiting for the punch line like this was a dream or a bad joke. Does she drink in the closed session or is this a serious comment? Did McWhinney fund her also? Clearly nobody believes she is contributing to the discussion do they?
--Jay R.

Silent Majority, I am not aware of any all white clubs still being around except for NASCAR and wrestling. The Lehman's are very good people who have done a lot for their community (Longmont). They don't deserve your libelous comments and will likely defend themselves.

Be careful.

Come on people..a hundred dollar contribution is really going to sway someone's vote? I think you should all run for council. Four council seats and the mayor's term is up in November. But be careful who you take money from because no matter where it comes from, someone will accuse you voting based on the few dollars you receive.

No, I am not nor do I have any connections to Marostica. Actually, I like the guy and believe he tries to do a good job.

Are we back to Pielin? Go to a council meeting and see for yourself if he sleeps or not.

White clubs? What white clubs? Name one.

Back to the issue: If I ran for coucil, I counldn't accept $101.00 from my neighbor? Or accept $1.00 from some local union? If you check, I believe you may have a hard time finding unions in the area.

Sorry people, but anytime the council votes for a development, you believe that the developer has the council in their pocket. What possible benefit does the council members get if some buisness or development builds in Loveland? I think some of you would only be happy if the council turned down everything.

Jennifer: What are you talking about? "fancy receptions"?? and now you "know that these clowns were bought and sold by the Mcwhinneys and Loveland Commerical" How do you know this...because you read it here?! If you belive it because you read it on this blog then you would believe anything.


--ouch

What is wrong with this blog? I have learned lots about the City Council and city business not anywhere else in town. Stuff you can't find anywhere else like tonight I just read Don William's horrible letter to the RTA group.

Ouch, you may have a tough time convincing people that the McWhinneys and Loveland Commercial give THOUSANDS of dollars to the Mayor and Councilors with no motive or purpose.

Businesses spend money to make money and I hardly believe they have no expectation that that money will have zero impact on their business before the city council.



--Jennifer

Which came first, the chicken or the egg. The McWhinneys and other groups make contributions not to buy votes but to keep the people in office that are "pro-growth". I would assume that most of the time the council votes in favor of the centerra developments. The 'yes' votes are based on what the council believes is best for the city not because they received contributions from certain individuals.

The McWhinneys and others will continue to support those that favor development in order to help them retain their council seats. But the monies are not to buy votes. The 'yes' votes are already there.

If you and others have a special project you would like to see approved you would probably donate to the people with similar goals and objectives. It's not so much buying the candiate as much as it is trying to keep out the ones that have a different viewpoint or agenda.

Happens all the time. Same as when people vote for for President. They arn't trying to buy the President, they just don't want the other person in office.






--ouch

Good try my friend but it is not going to work. The City Council are the custodians of the public's trust and should make desicions that benefit the city not specific camapign contributors.

You are mistanken if you think its a "pro" versus anti-growth people. The current Council (against the advice of their Construction Advisory Committee) implemented a terrible USE tax on developers while simply exempting Loveland Commercial and McWhinneys from this tax by waivers.

If they were "pro" growth, they would eliminate this tax that is such a burden to smaller developers like myself and my brother-in-law who got stuck by the city audit. Instead, they applied the law unequally and waive USE taxes from their contributors and screw the rest of us - no way buddy - there is nothing "pro" growth about this Council - it is a "pro-contributor" council.

Giving away tax dollars meant for city services for the next 25 years was an outrage that every thinking member of this community was shocked to see happen in 2004 - unfortunately, they were just elected in 2003.

City planning tells me NONE of the current crew is going to run for re-election. I wouldn't either if I voted to give the McWhinneys tax dollars for 25 years.

Sorry bud - you are flat dead wrong on this one. I will support any candidate who stops the USE tax on developers.
--Art

What to bet....You will see several current council members run again. Let's see, only tax on bare land or a portion of tax on all the new development. I wonder what is better for the citizens.

If I remember correctly, some small developers got money back because of the use tax that was used on a old chart. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that the city exempted those who had to pay because of the citys mess-up...at the city council's urging. I could be wrong on this but I was sure that is what happened.
--ouch

Ouch, you must be familiar with "TIF." That is the tax increment financing. The City ISN'T getting the higher taxes when the redevelopment agency is used because any new taxes generated go back to the LURA to build the infrastructure the developer should have put in at the beginning. In the meantime-services to those places isn't free so there is less for West Loveland. Just like the 5 minute requirement for fire response being put into question. How could a Fire Chief defend lowering the standard for the city in fire safety????? What professional does this unless their job is at stake by a tyranical City Manager????

If you know some characters who post here (I do at least a few) you would know the three Councilors they don't have too much problem with are Glenn Rousey, Walt Skowron and Daryl Klassen. They ask questions and appear to care.

The rest are like bumps on a log who only speak to defend a campaign contributor but othersise contribute nothing.

I believe your views have merit but why aren't these things ever debated by Council?

Lastly, the City was using old numbers and this hurt a lot of developers because we "detrimentally relied" on those city numbers for material costs on the use tax. You are right, when a number of folks complained to council about the audit (I couldn't go for health reasons) they did on a case by case basis cut people slack.

In the meantime, the tax remains and continues to benefit the out of town corporate builders while the rest of use who don't get waivers continue to struggle in the difficult housing market.
--Art

Art: You are right with regards to TIF. Sorry, the tax I'm talking about is the retail sales tax from the stores on the property, which is larger than the property tax loss through TIF.

I fully agree with you on the fire department response times. It was presented to the city council and the change was not accepted at a study session. I believe, however, it will come back again.
--ouch

Well, we can agree on something! I hope we get some warning because I want to gather some folks to speak to the Council if that happens.
--Art

By the way, Lovenders for Fair Elections just wants you to know the signatures are only to put it on the ballot so voters can decide. So signing it just means you want voters to have the chance to decide. Thanks for your time.
--Anne

I agree with Ann. Lets go sign the Petition and let the citizens of Loveland Decide in November. I found folks at the Library on Saturday with the petition. They said you could find the Petition at 218 E. 6 street across from the county building on 6 street.
Gil43

--gil43

I agree with Ann. Lets go sign the Petition and let the citizens of Loveland Decide in November. I found folks at the Library on Saturday with the petition. They said you could find the Petition at 218 E. 6 street across from the county building on 6 street.
Gil43

--gil43