Highlights:
- Are developer donations a conflict of interest?
- Developer donations debated in District 1.
- An incumbent Denver City Council member hasn’t been unseated since 1987.
Developer donations were a hot topic at the April 1 debate between Rafael Espinoza and incumbent City Councilwoman Susan Shepherd.
Last August, when it was apparent that developer contributions to Councilwoman Susan Shepherd would be a big campaign issue in her bid to be re-elected to the Denver City Council on May 5, I started researching what was sure to be a hot topic.
I wanted to expand it beyond District 1, where Shepherd is being challenged by architect and neighborhood activist Rafael Espinoza.
Last summer, Espinoza already was hammering Shepherd for accepting campaign contributions from developers from outside District 1 in northwest Denver.
He has made it a key talking point in what, based on history, would appear to be an uphill battle. An incumbent council member in Denver apparently has not been defeated since Mary DeGroot unseated “Big John” Silchia in 1987. Also, Shepherd’s war chest is about three times that of Espinoza’s.
I started to create a spreadsheet with all of the donations from developers and other real estate professionals for each council member last summer.
However, it became too time-consuming for me, as I am a one-person operation working three jobs. (In addition to my blog, sponsored by 8z Real Estate, I work part-time for the Colorado Real Estate Journal and write freelance articles).
Plus, I didn’t know who else would throw their hat into the ring closer to the elections and whether those candidates would receive real estate industry support.
However, I did notice a trend during my research: quite a few, if not the majority of the council members, had received contributions from developers and other real estate professionals.
Indeed, it was not unusual for council members to receive contributions from real estate professionals who had developed or marketed projects in the council person’s neighborhood.
I reached out to respected political analyst and pollster Floyd Cirulli, to get his thoughts and perspective on what he thought of local politicians receiving campaign contributions from developers and others in the real estate industry.
This is what Cirulli, principal of Cirulli Associates told me:
“As your research shows, builders, developers and real estate interests are active participants in city government. This is because one of the most important jobs of city government is directing land use. Every area of the city has some development and it often brings benefits, but also conflicts.
Hence the question is not that a candidate receives funds from business interests in land use, but what kind of decisions do they make?
As you know, there is a comprehensive plan and a planning process designed with advocarial features to represent homeowners, neighborhood associations, developers, builders and Realtors.
Ms. Shepherd may be vulnerable to some specific decision or non-decision, but simply taking funds is neither unusual nor prima facie a conflict.”
Fast-forward eight months.
Challenger Rafael Espinoza has hammered incumbent Susan Shepherd on developer donations.
Twenty eight minutes and 20 seconds into the April 1 debate between Shepherd and Espinoza, they were asked a question posed by an audience member: Do you think it is appropriate to accept a contribution from a developer and then approve its zoning application?
It was the only time during the one hour, six-minute and 58 second question and answer session at the historic Oriental Theater on West 44th Avenue, in which some members of the audience broke out in applause. (They were admonished for doing so, as they had been instructed to save their applause until the end, to provide the candidates the maximum time to answer questions).
Shepherd responded by saying that she has accepted contributions from individuals who support her vision for a walkable and sustainable northwest Denver.
She went on to that she believes the donations she received represents a broad range of people, including a number of union groups, environmentalists, and the Colorado BlueFlower Fund, a nonprofit, women’s pro-choice group.
Shepherd noted that she has received more than 300 individual contributions, with an average donation of less than $200.
Espinoza’s answer to whether he would accept a contributions from a developer and then approve the zoning sought by the developer, was short and succinct.
“No,” Espinoza said.
He elaborated that this is a representative democracy and in his opinion accepting cash from out-of-district special interest groups, such as developers, is “not what the council is here for.”
Such developers, would expect access to city council members in exchange for the cash, according to Espinoza. He said he sees his role as listening to renters and homeowners in District 1, not to developers who do not live in northwest Denver.
Incumbent Susan Shepherd said her broad-based contributions reflect support of her vision for a walkable and sustainable NW Denver.
Meanwhile, much of the debate, outside of the developer donations, resolved around development and real estate issues.
Espinoza, for example, said a recent TV report of a “beautiful Denver Square” home being surrounded by a 27-unit townhome development in Jefferson Park was a “travesty.”
Shepherd said she thought it was important to be careful not to criticize the people who are living in new homes and apartments. Rather, it is better to reach out to those people and families and help them become engaged in the neighborhood, she said.
She also said that morning she had attended a meeting of a potentially creative way to bring more architectural distinction to new homes.
The idea is create an overlay district that would allow developers to construct taller buildings, if they incorporated pitched roofs, instead of flat roofs, into the design, Shepherd explained.
Espinoza, during the debate, said he does not oppose density, but said density for density’s sake does not make sense.
He said he fears that the historical character of Denver neighborhoods is being superseded and reshaped by high-end housing and apartments. In addition to being an architect, Espinoza also has developed affordable housing.
Shepherd noted that there have only been two “up-zonings” in northwest Denver in the past 20 years. The most recent example was for a 12-story condo tower on the former St. Anthony’s site across from Sloan’s Lake. That decision followed more than 60 neighborhood meetings that addressed a wide-range of opinions and issues. She said a leader has to take a stand on such an issue. She voted in favor of the rezoning, which she said she believed was in the best interest of the neighborhood and Denver.
While she did not address the issue, some of the most high-profile projects that have been pilloried by a number of residents, such as a 5-story apartment community at West 38th Avenue and Lowell Boulevard, and a three-building apartment project near West 32nd and Lowell, are not examples of up-zonings approved under Shepherd’s watch. Rather, the developers are allowed by “right” to build such apartment communities under the zoning that was approved by council before Shepherd took office.
Also, the two were not at loggerheads on every development issue.
For example, during the “lightning round” portion of the debate, when they were told to give “yes” or “no” answers to questions, both Shepherd and Espinoza said they would not sell their house to a developer that planned to scrape it.
Meanwhile, according to the latest campaign finance report, Shepherd had received total contributions of $72,498. Espinoza’s total contributions, as of March 15, stood at $24,660.
Have a story idea or real estate tip? Contact John Rebchook at JRCHOOK@gmail.com. InsideRealEstateNews.com is sponsored by 8z Real Estate. To read more articles by John Rebchook, subscribe to the Colorado Real Estate Journal.
Related Posts:
The post Developer donations hot topic appeared first on Inside Real Estate News.