#rouxblackfivepoints

[blackfriend5280]

Roux Black PAC Voter Guide: Nov. 3, 2015 Edition 

Proposition BB: Do we let Colorado keep $66 million dollars—that would otherwise be refunded to taxpayers, retail pot cultivators, and retail pot purchasers—to spend on school construction and marijuana education/prevention programs?     YES!

·      Reasoning: Two-thirds of the money will go directly towards school construction, a key factor in getting Amendment 64 passed, so voter desire will be met. In addition, the average tax refund for most Colorado residents would be near $8; while that isn’t NO money, it isn’t enough to fundamentally sway an individual’s life; a competent pre-school in an at-risk area will. And the money towards those prevention programs will also go towards rehab centers and homeless facilities that desperately need it!

 Question 2B: Do we let Denver keep roughly $5 million dollars, that they’d have to refund because of TABOR, to spend on municipal projects (The younger brother of the above issue)?            YES!

·      Reasoning: Besides the fact that it makes little sense to vote yes on BB and no on 2B (philosophically or pragmatically, with regards to TABOR), this would set a precedent for the return of tax money in the marijuana industry and bolster positive public perception/reception of pot shops. Additionally, this isn’t a new tax or an amendment to a previous one: the government essentially admitted they under-guessed a previous amount and is asking for permission to keep what they gained.

 Question 1A: Do we allow Denver to amend its deal with Adams County in order to annex more land for DIA (Denver International Airport), resulting in job creation and economic development for both counties, understanding that Denver will share the tax revenue with Adams County? NO!

·      Reasoning: Primarily a question of over extending. Denver has at least two massive, costly undertakings to complete in the next few years: the light rail expansion (mostly already funded) and the 1-70/Swansea-Globeville-Elyria Restoration, a large part of which is based on the re-haul of the National Western Complex. The former has yet to really prove itself besides the W line, and the latter is still up to voters, on this ballot, as to whether Denver can increase its debt to pay for (Question 2C). Denver is expanding rapidly, and by itself, 1A isn’t particularly bad. But combined with 2C, the construction from 2B (if its passed), and a host of other issues Denver needs to deal with regarding population influx, 1A seems like a currently unnecessary stretch of resources.

Question 2C: Do we allow Denver to raise its debt to $778 million (by borrowing $479 million) in order to finance the restoration of the National Western Complex and surrounding neighborhoods?        YES!

·      Reasoning: Voters last year agreed to extend the existing 1.75% lodging/car rental tax concerning the NWC, so it stands to reason they’ll vote yes for this, which is probably why the city planned it this way. Over-the-barrel tactics aside, this money would go a long way to revitalizing a part of Denver that sorely needs it and is largely ignored. Improved transportation, access to fresh food, job creation: if implemented consciously, this plan has a lot in store for the Swansea/Globeville neighborhood. The city plans to play back part of the loan with revenue raised from the lodging/car rental tax, as well as bonds, notes, and other measures.

[blackfriend5280]

In the past few weeks, three petition drives were launched in order to pose these questions to the voters in November: will Denver allow certain private businesses to condone limited public marijuana consumption with restrictions, and will Colorado redefine same-sex marriages as civil unions? (The third would allow wedding industry businesses opposed to same-sex marriage to contract out their services.) Denverites: you should sign the petition to get the marijuana public consumption question on the ballot. Coloradans, you should not sign the petition to get the initiative on the ballot to redefine same-sex marriage.

           The first one is simple to justify: Denver is a global trailblazer, if you’ll forgive the pun, and legitimizing cannabis clubs and/or bars that allow bring-your-own-weed consumption would be a major step towards decriminalizing marijuana in the States. (Subjectively it helps, cutting down on the feeling of resentment held by some residents towards tourists that brazenly smoke in public.) It gives tourists somewhere to consume marijuana and keep it in the state. Limited public consumption avenues would decrease the need for police resources focused on nabbing public smokers. Pueblo and Nederland already have a similar situation in place with regards to the one proposed in the Denver initiative. Plus, it only needs 5,000 signatures to get on the ballot. So, sign that, then vote yes on it in November.

           The language and motives behind the proposed civil union amendment are bigoted and illogical, and this initiative is easy not to support. Besides being audacious enough to think they can circumvent the recent Supreme Court decision—the amendment would redefine same-sex marriages as civil unions, thus removing some of the legal rights of marriage—the two lawyers from Littleton who wrote the law utilize completely backwards reasoning: “A marriage is recognized as a religious expression…that shall not be abridged through the state…recognizing any law…that defines marriage in opposition or agreement to any particular religious belief.” Seriously? This language essentially says, “My religion says marriage is this, so the laws should be based on that, but they also can’t be based on what anyone else’s religion, or lack thereof, has to say about it.” Which, besides being hypocritical, also presumes the validity of one religion, and basically ignores the whole idea of church and state (where are the defenders of the Constitution when you bring that up?). The initiative needs 99,000 signatures to get on the ballot, and the population of Littleton is only 42,000, so if none of us sign it, and ::goes to check the Springs’ population::…ok, well, NO ONE IN DENVER SIGN THIS PETITION if you see it.

           The Supreme Court decision deals with the legal rights of marriage as determined in the United States, so your religion can consider a same-sex marriage invalid (or immoral or a precursor to horse-leprechaun marriage or whatever) but the IRS shouldn’t, and now can’t. There’s a moment when two characters are arguing in a Star Trek: Voyager episode: one of the characters quits the argument abruptly, and an onlooker asks, “How do you get him to give in so fast?” The character that won answered “I wait until his own illogic overwhelms him.” This is how I feel about this amendment, and what I believe the outcome will be if it even gets on the ballot.