City Council: Quotes and Takeaways

The Board of the Raven Hills HOA on Tuesday, April 11th presented to the City Council their appeal of the City's Planning Commission's approval of a conditional use permit for the home child care located at 50 Mikado Drive.

City Council voted 7-2 to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and as a result denied the Board's appeal. Their reasons for doing so are documented below in the form of direct quotes:

If we uphold the appeal right now, they can reapply in June? Without hinderance? They can reapply in June for the exact same thing and it doesn't come to the Council? So the value of accepting this appeal is… two months? They can go ahead and (expand the daycare) in two months? It's a fool's errand - if we go ahead and accept this appeal... when, in fact, it has no merit - when we're done with this entire conversation.  
-- Councilman Bill Murray

This is indeed a recently enacted law and it says, "prohibitions contrary to public policy, patriotic, political, or religious expression, public rights of way, fire prevention, renewable energy generation devices, affordable housing, drought prevention measures, and child care," and Ben, it looks to me like Colorado law specifically says, "not withstanding any provision in the declaration of bylaws or rules and regulations of the association to the contrary. An association shall not prohibit any of the following..." Then you go to (k), the operation of a family childcare home, and then it gives the definition... "Family child care homes may include large childcare homes." 
-- Councilman Wayne Williams

Mr. Williams is correct. Covenants that prohibit the operation of large childcare homes are void under state law.
-- City Attorney Ben Bolinger

August of 2022, they started this daycare center. And they were legal, from the city standpoint, allowed to operate a six-person daycare center. You noticed it was a six-person daycare center only after she applied for an extension from 6 to 12... Your specific request, right now, is to stop it from going to 12. Not stopping it from being 6? If it was a big enough problem, at six, you would have taken action. It's only when it goes to 12 that you're saying there's a specific problem? Now, you do realize, how counterproductive this argument is? If you argue covenants? Because six violates your covenants; 12 just doubles it. So you have to take covenants off the table unless you have taken specific action to enforce yourself those covenants... What you've told me is the six were not problematic. Because you took no action. That's something that I hold - I think it's an important thing for all of us to try to grasp our hands around what the specific issues are here.
-- Councilman Bill Murray

For me, the important part of the criteria that my colleague was just citing is whether the value and qualities of the neighborhood surrounding the conditional use are substantially injured. And when I look at eight additional trips a day, a drop off and a pick up, and the difference between eight kids, potentially, and twelve, I don't see how you reach a substantial injury. I think the empirical evidence is divided as to whether there is an adjustment - the one study that was actually cited shows values actually go up as a daycare becomes available... When I look at whether there's a substantial injury, I also look at the fact this was going on and at least some of the people in the HOA said they had no awareness of it until the city sent the notice. Well, it's hard for me to accept that there's a substantial injury if you're not even aware it's going on... I think the injury, if there is any at all, is minor. 

-- Councilman Wayne Williams   

You live on the cul-de-sac but say you weren't aware there was a daycare business going on there until you got the notice from the city? So, sir, it appears there's not been that much of an impact if you live on that very cul-de-sac and never noticed it for months. 

-- Councilman Wayne Williams

You mentioned the concern about property values. I would just offer that there might be a young family that would come in and that would enhance the property value because they would love to have a daycare next door. In fact, I think we heard from someone who lives in your neighborhood who finds this very appealing. 

-- Councilwoman Nancy Henjum

It is a daycare desert. It is so difficult for people to find daycare anywhere in this city. The pandemic exacerbated that. And here we have a couple that is stepping into the line of fire and wanting to provide that. And it's not easy. We want to be a City that makes it easier for people to apply to run a business and to have a business. Not only is this a really good business, it provides an essential service that we really need to have... A young family would probably love to live by a daycare center which is integrated with the neighborhood. I applaud (Stacie) for moving forward with all this opposition and difficulty... The complaints didn't come until after the HOA put it out there. So I'm going to vote no on this, because I think this is a business that - this is essential. 

-- Councilwoman Yolanda Avila

I've spent eight years fighting for covenants and the enforcement of those covenants. In this particular case it's between the HOA, which I think needs to work their own internal issues out… In two months, (Stacie) is going to be allowed to do this anyway. So, you know, I'm asking for adaptation. I'm asking for consideration from both sides. As you see an issue surface, you resolve that issue amongst yourselves. I've seen too many HOAs splinter with these kind of environments. I'd do everyone a disservice by not denying the appeal... Take the actions you perceive you need to take with the conditional situation you have, and if you feel compelled to go to court on this, please, do it. But sit down with them, and sit down with the community, and try to work it out first. 

-- Councilman Bill Murray