Redesigning Greeley Colorado--A Political Cow Town

Greeley Colorado is an interesting town to figure out. Especially when you are coming at it from a different point of view than most folks raised here. Currently I have been tracking articles about the District 6 mill levy, the Greeley City Council election, District 6 Teacher Union negotiations, and, one of my favorite snail-snot companies--JBS Swift. Just thinking about writing on these topics is beginning to make me cringe. A lot of good people involved and a lot of bad planning and outdated ideas used.

Combine this with the fact I've never quite got the hang of the East/West versus North/South orientation of the town and end up driving endlessly across the prairie even when I am just popping out for coffee--I get to spend a lot of time just looking at the beautiful mythic trees, architectural styles, and a lot of frothing-at-the-treasure-chest developments running amok to the south and west (I think) of Greeley. Then there are the empty store fronts. Ramshackle buildings leaning too far over the sidewalk. The unkempt and ungreen sections of town. All speckled in between beautiful manicured older developments, the nice college campuses, places where people rarely venture into their front yards to associate with their neighbors but spend hours politely maintaining their end of the bargain.

And never the twain shall meet. Is this libertarianism? Is it protectionism? Is it racism? Or is it just plain lack of a City Council having much idea how to pull it all together--before the treasure chest is emptied trying to encourage big business and special interests to spread Greeley around like melted butter on a counter top.

After a week of being under-enlightened and disillusioned over the lack of zoning and planning and with special interest editorials pouring out of the fingers of the staff at the Tribune I finally turned to my local "tour guides" and other acquaintances for answers. There are so many things to like about Greeley (especially the people) it doesn't make a lot of sense to me why they don't take more interest in their own town. Is it really easier to just move out and let the sprawl mafia take over?

We've spent more than a few hours over coffee educating Jane.

"Greeley is just a cow town that never really wanted to be a city but finds itself now a city..." I was told.

The light snapped on. Now I have been told a lot of other things as well but this item, above, just made all the pieces of the puzzle come flying together.

It makes sense why there has been little prudent economic development planning. My opinion of course. It makes sense why Greeley's overall strategic economic and development position is being more directed by regional economic planners and UNC's concept of business planning than it is by the City "Elders" shall we say. Greeley doesn't want to grow up to be something it doesn't want to be--a big city. Although it still isn't clear why the prairie palace developers are allowed to walk away with spreading out their wings and pooping all over Northern Colorado. I thought that is what zoning was all about and what the ranchers and farmers were all about--making sure that stuff didn't happen. But I digress.

The people in the castle on the hill (Greeley City Council and its Mayor) do not have enough incentive to be fully invested in the long term interests of the town. If you've ever been a public persona, well, let's just say it is a pretty thankless job unless you are paid a lot of money to focus your interest or at least given enough political clout to get a good seat in the top restaurant without waiting.

I once implied to a group of Greelians that someone ought to paid for putting 100% interest into the Greeley Good Ship Lollipop. This was upon finding out that the Mayor only receives a stipend as well as counsel members. Half the room, Republican fiscal conservatives, choked on their coffee while the other half politely explained to me that the Mayor really didn't do anything. Ed Clark might object but then again I heard he got elected on the basis of his pleasing personality and big night stick. Back to Jane's advisers, the main ladies in the room pointed out that mostly the council is white, retired, and special interest laden. (I already figured that part out but didn't think it would make me a very pleasurable coffee companion to bring it up). It was noted several are law enforcement types and public works service types without any serious background in economics and economic development. Makes sense if you take a look at the results of what they have been applying to Greeley over the years. Piecemeal cow town with a corral around any and every culture to keep them from "mixing" in with the herd. On a subconscious level no doubt.

After all I'm sure everyone would be thrilled to have a highly educated Somali with citizenship run for City Council. Right? Right? The point is to get the job done, right? Same with the local School Board. Right? It's who can do the best job not who can maintain the existing social status quo. We ended coffee chat at this point. Two many "rights" from someone labeled "left".

So I went home and took a look at the Greeley City Charter. Obviously not something to read over candlelight and a football game. Oh, that makes sense--the mayor gets the title of being executive officer but all the official powers and prerogatives of being executive officer have been gutted and handed over to the City Manager, Chief Administrative Official of the City. You have to read, sorry, a bit further to see the gutting of the fish. The actual authoritative decision making is given in detail over to the City Manager later on down the charter pages. An unelected official by the way. One that the electorate can't vote out of power if they should be unhappy. Not good on the direct representation or concept of democracy scale Greeley.

The proposed Charter provides that the Mayor shall be the Chief Executive Officer of the City, the City Council shall be the policy-making authority, and a City Manager to be appointed by the City Council for an indefinite term, the Chief Administrative Official of the City.

Who designed this burg, again? Oh yeah, it is a cow town. It doesn't want planning, design, regulation, zoning, and government. Just financial conservatism and corrals around all the "types" of people that are "different".

Well I hate to be the one that pops the balloon because I kind like the folksy cow town idea. I grew up around one of those. However it is hard not to point to the fact that while tending the cows the horse has now left the barn and ain't comin' back. Greeley is a small city. And it is a small city without any real obvious direction on how to create an effective government that will spend enough money to plan for the best future of the town at the least cost to the individual taxpayer. In other words fiscal constraint doesn't work without prudent investment and good long term social integration policies. It isn't just about today. It is about the infrastructure your children inherit tomorrow.

Yes, I'm sorry Virginia, there isn't any Santa Claus. Somebody is going to have to connect the cement sidewalks, water pipes, and city services to all those roaming red-nose developers in the middle of nowhere. That is you and me, babe. The guys back at the local Greeley government ranch are just gonna let the developers ride into town as tax free as possible and plop down where ever they point to the ground with the cry of "Jobs!" Tsssk. Tsssk. Then there is the whole issue of educating the public. All the public not just the kids in the charter schools on the right side of town. You want a real gang problem Greeley? Just refuse to invest and redevelop the "other" side of town. Disrespect breeds disrespect in any culture. Let education continue to fail the masses in District 6 and the lack of all day Kindergarten and textbooks for the kiddies won't be all that comes tumbling down.

Time to think of Greeley's value investment. Time to think of Greeley as an investment. Time to think of Greeley as a cow town that can kick ass if someone cares enough about it.

Diversity of business (Mom and Pops), economic development, revitalization of the downtown strip, redevelopment, education and gang management, and federal grant management hopefully is going to pop up on some one's view finder. Put the cow town politics to bed and start demanding someone manage the entire ranch and build good fences.

But then as the Greeley Tribune Cheerleader says today in its editorial, they are just happy so many citizens are interested in government. *Without really being paid to do the job (my addition). Yes, they are interested, I'll toast to that... but the real question is will the person they elect have to be the right color, the right sex, the right age group, local only, and do they have to represent a special interest or authority figure to get elected.

We, living in Greeley, already know the answer to this question... don't we?

Time for a change. Right turn Clyde.



Supreme Court Upholds Mill Levy Freeze

Uranium Coffee Table Chat for Greeley Colorado

I've been working on a project for a few days and have been laggard in my postings.  But I came across some interesting links in my email tonight that revisit the Uranium issues for the Durango Colorado area and Northern Colorado and thought I would post up the links here at least for those interested in doing more research on the topic. If there is anyone out there who still feels there is a chance to buck the political powers in the region on this one.

Below is a great site with some very good well written articles covering many sides of the issue.

Arizona Geology: Colorado's uranium legacy

Thursday, August 13, 2009
Colorado's uranium legacy

With the debate heating up over uranium exploration and mining in Arizona, Colorado is having a similar debate over reopening a uranium mill near the historic mining town of Durango [right, mill tailings pile. Credit, WISE-Uranium.org]. The Durango Herald last week published an impressive set of articles looking at the history of mining and milling in the region. I haven't read all of the articles yet, but the ones I have read are good.

Uranium mining hinges on markets, courts - 8/12/2009
Some companies 'mining Wall Street' - 8/12/2009
Health risks from mines covered up - 8/11/2009
Ore from last uranium boom still scattered on Colorado land - 8/11/2009
Tensions high over plans for uranium mill - 8/10/2009
Reed Hayes: One false step, 41 years of pain - 8/10/2009
Lee Sutherland: Still working, still healthy - 8/10/2009
Marie Moore: Farming, ranching came first - 8/10/2009
Marie Templeton: Life's work is in history - 8/10/2009
Coloradans grapple with promise, threat of uranium - 8/9/2009
Town ceases to exist after Superfund cleanup - 8/9/2009
Mill will control pollution, company says - 8/9/2009

Greeley Colorado's Future--SAT's are in

Considering all the chatter about Greeley's District 6 Mill Levy Tax Override I thought this small foray into the statistical trends facing the nation may be worthy of consideration. Today's kids are our future workforce and government. Greeley Colorado, whether special interests like it not, rides above a fifty-percent hispanic population. Couple that with lower per capita income for the northern colorado area and Greeley has a big future problem staring it in the face. It doesn't take courage or a leap of faith to make that speculation.

Time for the community to get serious about education and fixing those performance gaps by focusing on the lower performers.

Minority Participation, Scores Up for Some of the Washington Area's Class of '09 - washingtonpost.com

washingtonpost.com > Education
COLLEGE ADMISSION TESTS
Minority Participation, Scores Up for Some of the Class of '09

TOOLBOX
Resize
Print
E-mail
Yahoo! Buzz
COMMENT
43 Comments | View All »
POST A COMMENT
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
Why Do I Have to Log In Again?
Log In Again?
CLOSE
We've made some updates to washingtonpost.com's Groups, MyPost and comment pages. We need you to verify your MyPost ID by logging in before you can post to the new pages. We apologize for the inconvenience.


Discussion Policy
Your browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem.
Discussion Policy
CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging
» Links to this article
By Nick Anderson and Emma Brown
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Four out of 10 students who take the SAT are racial or ethnic minorities, the College Board reported Tuesday, a milestone for the college admissions test most widely used in the nation and the Washington region.

But scores of the wealthiest students are growing faster than scores of the poorest, and some racial disparities in test performance are widening.

Narrowing such achievement gaps has become a key issue. Loudoun County schools, contrary to the national trend, reported that average SAT scores for black and Hispanic students rose faster than for white students.

For the 1.5 million students nationwide in the Class of 2009 who took the 3-hour, 45-minute test, composite scores were 501 in critical reading, down one point from the year before; 515 in mathematics, unchanged; and 493 in writing, down one point. Those figures include results from public and private schools. The grading scale is 200 to 800 points for each section.

During the past decade, math scores have risen four points, and reading scores dropped four.

The College Board, a New York-based nonprofit organization that oversees the test, stressed participation trends, not scores. The 40 percent minority share of test-takers was up from 38 percent a year ago and 29.2 percent in 1999.

"We are tremendously encouraged by the increasing diversity of participation in the SAT," said College Board President Gaston Caperton. "As the equity gap narrows, more than ever, the SAT reflects the diversity of students in our nation's classrooms."

But one of the SAT's leading critics pointed to widening score gaps by race and income, despite many efforts to raise performance of disadvantaged students through the federal No Child Left Behind law. For example, black student scores fell four points (to 1276), while white scores fell two points (to 1581). Scores for students whose families earned more than $200,000 shot up 26 points (to 1702), while scores for those whose families earn $60,000 a year or less were unchanged or rose only slightly.

"It is becoming increasingly clear that the nation cannot test its way to better educational quality or equity," said Bob Schaeffer of the advocacy organization FairTest: National Center for Fair & Open Testing.

The SAT counted about 110,400 test-takers from Maryland, Virginia and the District in the Class of 2009, up from about 109,900 in 2005.

Greeley Colorado School District 6 Mill Levy Tax Requires Trust

Greeley Colorado School District 6 is getting closer to cutting a deal with taxpayers to increase funding for education this fall to help the under performing district get our community back up to par. There are a few more fine tuning points, on my agenda, before voters should sign on to supporting this initiative in hard times.

In regards to open disclosure to the readers of Greeleyville I have met with administration and District 6 teachers since my last postings (some are listed at the bottom of this post) and have heard good, promising, plans for improving past performance problems. Not all my concerns have been alleviated as I explain in the following critique. Although, specifically, I have been reassured that better math performance is on its way. I have also been reassured that the local school board has a foundational governance plan. Additionally, it is simply logical, to conclude that it is going to take a bit of time to pull District 6 out of the rut that previous poor administration and restrictive citizen-driven anti-education legislation has arguably placed it into. I personally, still, strongly prefer, that local tax increases be used to fund performance pay for top level teachers but without reforming basic school performance and statewide legislative issues first--that really is not a reasonable expectation. I'd like to keep that on a back burner though. It is doable and it can work to polish a school district's performance quickly.

Onto the Jane critique.

Apparently the district has issued new statements that contain certain specific goals for the new funding revenue to be spent on. They have also, if the Tribune has it right, generated specific threats for what will happen if the Mill Levy doesn't pass. Most the threats fall on the shoulders of middle class students but then again most the benefits are aimed at middle class students.

Hence one of my continued beefs is with the administration of District 6's lack of dealing with the core educational problems it faces. Low performing students need to be targeted for additional support and it is still unclear exactly what this District is willing to commit to for this sector of its educational community.

It is clear that there will be an emphasis on maintaining programs that service the high-end performing kids. Magnate programs and advanced placement courses will be continued if the Mill Levy passes. These programs "might not" be continued if it doesn't pass. Certainly high-end programs are important as high tech industry relying on science and math skills will be watching. Of course middle-class parents, often prone to thinking their own Johnny and Susie are brilliant super-stars in the making regardless of the facts, will also be interested in seeing these maintained.

These high-achiever programs however should not be promoted at the expense of the those students under performing in the district. According to the Greeley Tribune article the only bone being thrown to the current under performers is a bone called "adequate" academic instruction.

Hello? Would you care to define what "adequate" means.

Does it mean "just enough"? Does it mean the same under achieving low test mark performance that has been plaguing this district in the first place is acceptable again next year? Does it mean that this District is willing to do whatever it takes to bring these low performers up to adequate? Does it mean that the Greeley Tribune has misstated the press release?

One would hope it is more based on the latter than the former. The evidence doesn't point in that direction though. The statement says that non-English students will learn English. Of course they will. The question is whether or not they will become literate in the use of English. Without being literate in their first language it makes it very unlikely they will become literate in their second-language. Without appropriate and directed bilingual instruction the goal the District is setting is just a bone being thrown out to the lower performers. One that lacks any "meat" and "integrity" in change.

There is also a vague statement that math instruction will be maintained if the Mill Levy passes. Yipes! Does that mean it could get worse? Will they pull the new math series being introduced if it doesn't pass? Will they pull out the much needed math training for existing teachers? Does it mean fewer math majors hired (who tend to draw higher salaries--because they are also in demand in the private sectors)?

Just maintaining the status quo isn't okay. Threatening citizens that these staples will go away if they don't pass the tax measure isn't okay either unless that truly is what the administration means--just to maintain current levels of education. If other local districts are performing there is little reason that District 6 can't perform at least as well. Clarity please on this latest round of objectives. And where did the transportation issues and new technology spending ideas go? Don't confuse the voters more--help them to understand the need to support education.

Of course a lot of what is being seen is political posturing. Personally I am more for transparency then posturing. But I understand posturing. It is not a very powerful political position to stake out in this northern Colorado town that people, likely to be of color or of impoverished backgrounds, are going to get the taxpayer's dollars. Poverty doesn't make for low performers it just means there is not a lot of private funds to buy the tutors to help the student round out the education they are not getting from their local schools. But targeting the lower performing students is a position that is realistic and one that needs to be understood by the citizens calling for improvement in local schools. Remember a "C" student is the average.

So let's be clear, few would envy this administration the political task of making this argument to Greeley's taxpayers. However it should be expected the administration will also pursue what is best for the education of all the students. Whatever it takes to get those test scores up needs to be done or all taxpayers, job-seekers, and citizens will continue to suffer from the poor image of Greeley schools. It takes backbone in the face of local politics to be transparent. It also takes taxpayers willing to see beyond the end of their own backyard.

It takes a community to make good education happen.

So far most of what the District is promising, in this new press piece*, is "fluff" to get voters on board and voters are promising defeat without hearing any realities of what that defeat will do to the community well-being come tomorrow. The sides are entrenching which basically means little will be accomplished. Fine, I get the need behind entrenchment, but how about we step out of the business as usual box and get down into what really counts to make this happen--measuring the administration's performance. Yes, measurement for administrators, just like we want to measure teaching performance.

What is fair for the goose is fair for the gander. Let's put some numbers to it.

Here is what I'd like to see come from the District 6 administrators or their public image arm. Give the citizens of Greeley exacting and measurable performance standards. It will help voters have confidence that this administration is serious about helping all students--not just those that fall in the politically elite classes. Citizens of Greeley need to have it proven to them that their image of Greeley schools can change because change is happening. If the community waits until this administration gets to the ultimate finish line to reestablish trust in performance another entire generation could go wanting educationally.

Give us a reason to start trusting now.

If the District is saying that poor performing students will be given adequate instruction then is it fair to say that the citizens of Greeley will see a 5% gain in math scores every year for the next three years? Is it fair to say that low performing students in literacy will see a 3% gain every year for the next three years if voters pass the tax increase? Throw us a bone with some meat on it please.

If the District is saying that graduation rates will increase--give us a figure. A percentage or any figure. Something tangible to expect. Something, anything, so once this town gets serious about supporting local education voters have something tangible to measure the true worth of their financial commitments. Meet this goal and the next round will be a bit easier. Give the administrators a little public incentive to help the students who need it the most not just the politically expedient needy ones.

Get a backbone Greeley District 6. It is time to face the public and educate the voters with reality if you want to get your Mill Levy passed.

Greeley District 6 Mill Levy
Review of Greeley School Performance
Greeley Should Not Abandon the Arts

*I looked for a news release on this new set of "promises" cited by the Greeley Tribune at the District 6 School Board site under press releases but did not come up with any confirming information. It is my assumption that Tribune has obtained this information from a qualified source.

Greeley Council Thumbs Nose at Existing Mom and Pop's

Ma and Pa businesses in Greeley Colorado need to get hollerin' at the Greeley City Council. Greeley Council passed a resolution to lower development fees last Tuesday night. I really try to stay out of these battles as the public rarely gets a real transparent look at the goodies being traded across the table in these type of negotiations. But I can't help but notice Greeley's undies keep being exposed when it comes to long term strategic direction for this city. Time to get serious when electing these officials folks. Greeley isn't just a podunk town any longer.

The new fee break being handed around comes with a stench. Why are businesses coming in now getting sweet kissy-face deals at older businesses' expense. Why give one business a competitive advantage over existing businesses. The City's job is to court specific industry targets and development--not to wade into competitive positioning. It's like the honeymoon for all the Ma and Pa's struggling to stay afloat is over and now the best bedroom suite is being whipped out for new and expanding businesses.

The big problem is the sheets on that honeymoon bed aren't clean.

This strategy may appear fine and dandy on the surface for those businesses like Sooper's being romanced. After all it is an unfortunate common practice deployed by corporate interests and developers to sweet-talk councils into lowering their operational expenses. But, I'll argue, Greeley isn't every city and it has carved out special problems for itself that need a special strategy. Time to look those sweet-talkers in the face and get some real political backbone (and better advisors). Not to mention that the ugly smaller ducklings hanging back against the wall need to be asked to dance too.

What about infrastructure for the aging, decaying, poorer parts of town? What about redevelopment funds to draw people back into the sectors that have those empty store fronts? Who is going to get stuck with the bill to support all this infrastructure ten years from now? What about finding new ways to perk up those saggy bags under Greeley's eye and put facades in all those closed store fronts down 8th avenue? What about fluffing up the education sectors? The culture art activities are where again? Getting serious about getting monies and marketing together for a "real" Farmer's market? A generic, "sounds-good-to-me", tax base strategy will not get the job done except for those trying to keep Greeley a low-wage industry dumping ground for snail-snot companies with bad business practices.

JBS Swift Sinks Good-Ship-Lollipop

I get what the Council thinks it will achieve. By lowering these rates they will get more business in and might draw a few opportunities away from other, family-friendly, neighboring towns. That's not what the bigger forces in power have planned for Greeley.

Greeley's Barrio
Have You Seen Ma an Pa Lately

First of all, in the case of Sooper's, it is going to go where the studies show there is enough market to survive. It is trying to stay competitive with the well capitalized Safeway expansions and that's all good, in the long run, for the consumer. But helping them out? Back door subsidies for special interests are not any prettier viewed locally than they are nationally. Are we going to do this every time a food store wants a little more elbow room? Whisper a few sweet corporate words in a Councilperson's ear about ...."just can't quite make it happen with those fees and taxes..." and off flies the dress and the romance begins.

We need savvy deal makers instead of social engineers at the city helm. Someone who can see past the first dance and date. One of the bolder early strategies of Walmart in rural areas was to open up stores close to their smaller competitors, wait until the competition's ship sunk, then close the store and allow the regional store to service everybody. Is Greeley going to subsidize this type of activity too. Do the existing Mom and Pop's really not in market position to expand or move going to have to float the bigger corporate machines with minimum wage jobs as they, supposedly, roll into town to bring all these new job opportunities?

Who has the Greeley Town Council's ear?

Oh that's right, the Northern Colorado Economic dudes and dudettes have it. Well Greeley City Council just danced really pretty for their "economically 1970 minded" counterparts. As I have said in earlier postings--it is pretty clear Greeley has lined itself up to be the economic armpit of Northern Colorado by making poor decisions on what type of companies (JBS Swift is one that comes to mind) to groom for life in Greeley. Now, by showing its undies and willingness to cut rates for low returns, Greeley has just thrown open the doors to continue this type of snail-snotter corporate development. And Ma and Pa will be helping taxpayers float these boats.

Thank you Greeley City Council.

Greeley needs a better plan, better advisers, and full-time dedicated politicians to pull it out of the position it has allowed itself to be pushed into. Redevelop the side of town where people only make $20k a year. Get that plan working for pumping the Farmer's Market and snag those funds you flipped your nose at. Make a strategic plan to lower the rates for the types of businesses that bring in stable families and living wage jobs. Attract new types of industry--not just ANY type of industry. Make a target and aim for it. City Council may not have advanced economic degress but haven't you guys ever played Sim City? Promote education and weave it throughout all age groups in the city. Make a thriving viable city-square out of the old barrio areas and bring in small businesses, artist studios, and revive some of those cool old buildings like the Kress. Get people walking around town and talking to each other instead of doing the Stepford family thing on the West end of town. Bring the Munsters and the Stepfords together and mix them all up--a healthy economy is a diverse economy with a strong Ma and Pa sector.

Otherwise we are all going to end up being the hairy old arm pit of Northern Colorado and a low-wage service community to Fort Collins. The professionals will live in Fort Collins, spend money in Fort Collins, develop Fort Collins quality of life, and drive into Greeley everyday for work and drive home at night to live and kick up their heels. Meanwhile Greeley will have low rent, low wage, decaying infrastructure left to service the retirees who have stuck it out, the toxic factory jobs, and a bunch of abandoned buildings. The only green in town will be the castle on the hill called UNC.

Voters in Greeley should look carefully at who they elect this fall. Out with the old and in with the new. Time to look outside the box for answers and quit shooting down ideas simply because they come from "outsiders". And ask your handy-dandy economic development industry pushers--just what that candy-coated advice they are giving you is going to lead to in the long run. Besides the shiny-badge editorials from their buddies in the local newspaper of course.

Time to build your own spine Greeley and quit laying down in the middle of the road so the rest of Northern Colorado can dump on you.

Just my opinion... of course.