top of page


Sample email below

The City presented their final draft of ReToolCOS to the Planning Commission and City Council and are aiming to have this rushed through and approved by October 30th, 2022.  The part where they try to muzzle public opposition was intentionally vague and not thoroughly discussed.  It's crystal clear what they want:  to take away our voice to object to development.  Combine with the City-funded CONO organization which seeks to act as an agent for the City and is heavily involved in trying to create neighborhood boards or select those positions, the people will be left with minimal-to-no voice.  


We also have some concerns about the R-Flex zoning category which enable mixed use, commercial and residential, as well as appears to enable more administrative discretion in development.  We are concerned that there might be situations like, for example, building a hotel extension in Strawberry Fields which many have long believed was the ultimate goal for that still undeveloped land which they were in such a rush to transfer from the people's land to the Broadmoor.  We also think it helps with the swift development of the new "mini-downtown" at Highway 24 and I-25 among, likely, many other yet unforeseen plans.  We encourage you to take the minutes it takes to send an email to our leadership asking that they take more time to allow the public to understand and voice objections to this plan as well as ask that they better explain it.  Many of these items were light on detail or discussion.

Below is an email you and copy/paste and send.  Be sure to copy the press and us for transparency and accountability.  The press needs to see this.  It does matter.



Dear Mayor Suthers,

I am extremely troubled by both the content and haste with which the City is trying to pass ReToolCOS.  This re-writing of the development code has been underway for 2 years.  The final version was just presented recently with very sketchy explanations about critical pieces which have been controversial.  Namely, the attempt to limit the ability of the public to appeal developments both by proximity to a site, the now proposed 2 miles, and the nebulous eligibility criteria now added.  I find this especially troubling given that the recently revived City-funded CONO which has stated they are an agent of the City and is involved in setting neighborhood boards will further stifle citizens' ability to appeal any development.  This seems like an extreme and deliberate attempt to muzzle the people and make it even easier on developers who already have an enormous advantage in the approval process.  This is unacceptable and needs to be removed from the ReTool plan.

Additionally, the R-Flex zoning appears to be rife with challenges and unclear.  Anytime one uses "flex" in the title of a criteria, it raises red flags.  I am concerned that such flexibility and enabling vague standards including mixing commercial and residential uses among others may prevent the public from being able to appeal large developments that would, under current zoning rules, require more rigor to develop with appropriate public involvement.

It feels like you are changing the rules to benefit developers even more at the expense of those of us who you should be representing first.  Please respect our intelligence and have the integrity to take the time to enable thoughtful inquiry from the public and slow down this process.  



bottom of page