'Brouhaha' over park booze
By Daniel J. Chacon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published April 23, 2008 at 1:59 p.m.
Updated April 23, 2008 at 2:29 p.m.
Denver City Councilwoman Peggy Lehmann is asking Mayor John Hickenlooper's office to review the notification process of public hearings after what she called a "brouhaha" with the Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation.
Last week, INC wrote Hickenlooper a strongly worded letter complaining that no one had told them about a proposed change to the alcohol policy in city parks.
Hickenlooper responded to the letter Tuesday, saying the Parks and Recreation Department "has conducted significant outreach about the proposed changes" and a May 8 public hearing.
Hickenlooper also wrote that he was told that Larry Ambrose, INC's secretary, was at an April 7 meeting when the proposed changes were discussed.
Ambrose said he "categorically denied" the mayor's assertion.
"We reacted because (Parks and Rec) is doing this without our knowledge," he said.
The proposal would allow the consumption, but not the sale, of "spirituous liquor" at private parties with an event permit. It affects City Park Pavilion, Chief Hosa Lodge and the Montclair Civic Building, known as the Molkery.
The current concessionaire at City Park Pavilion has a license to serve spirituous alcohol, but the department is taking over operations in June, so the proposed change would allow hard liquor to continue to be served there.
"We're wanting to maintain that level of service," department spokeswoman Jill McGranahan said.
The proposal also calls for the allowance of beer, wine and champagne to be served at Central Park at Stapleton. Central Park is currently privately owned and allows these uses, but ownership is going to be transferred to the city, so the department wants to keep offering the same allowances.
In the letter, the mayor said the department followed the municipal code and gave notice of the hearing in the Denver Daily Journal, the city's official publication, among other places.
But members of the council's public amenities committee said Wednesday the hearing should be posted "where people will see it."
Councilwoman Marcia Johnson said she didn't know where the Journal was located.
"What is it?" she asked.
Lehmann said some council members didn't know about the proposed change.
"I heard from INC before I heard from anybody else," she said.
INC represents nearly half of the city's 211 registered neighborhood organizations.
Heather Barry, Hickenlooper's neighborhood liaison, said she would take Lehmann's suggestion back to the mayor's office.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Denver turns 150
Read about the city's history, look at old photos and see a list of influential Denverites.
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Weekend plans?
Figure out things to do this weekend with the help of our entertainment calendar.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's pregame rant on the Raiders.
-
Season To Share
The Post-News Season To Share campaign provides grants to area nonprofits.
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
The Rocky was there when Colorado became a state in 1876. Read our coverage.
-
A Dozen on Denver
And the winner is... Robert Ziegler! See the whole fiction series by clicking here.
April 23, 2008
2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
TheDenverB writes:
editors: information on what the policy change is should be more prominently placed in the story.
as it reads, the story is confusing.
April 23, 2008
2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
EP writes:
I agree, I think that information on the actual alcohol policy in public parks and proposed changes laid out would make the story more cohesive and informative.
April 23, 2008
3:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ztliano writes:
What, no get it?
April 23, 2008
4:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
holekeeper writes:
so are they mad that you can drink? or they dont want you to drink? or that you need a permit to drink? what the hell?
April 23, 2008
4:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
JustSayin writes:
"the department followed the municipal code and gave notice of the hearing in the Denver Daily Journal, the city's official publication, among other places."
Hiding things in plain sight, in publications no one reads. The quaint village of Estes Park regularly does this, using the legal notices section of a local newspaper which is officially the 'paper of record', totally ignoring the fact that the Trail-Gazette is pathetic and hardly anyone bothers to read it anymore. A common municipal practice, so it seems.
April 23, 2008
9:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
DMarkofsky writes:
This is another example of the current Administration trying to implement policies without genuine public involvement. Involvement means getting the public and stakeholders involved when policy is being created. Not simply telling (or claiming to tell) citizens and RNO's after the fact.
We are lucky to have citizens like Larry Ambrose, my neighborhood association president, watching out for us.
April 24, 2008
12:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
happymike44 writes:
Why does anybody need to sit in a public place and get hammered.What gives them a right to sit at a park and drink.I can tell you if you allow drinking in public it will lead to fights,robberies,d.u.i.s.So what people need to remember is do you want your kid dealing with a drunken bozo.I think not is the answer,because I do not want to worry that I might encounter a drunken gun wielding idiot.While taking my dog for a walk.My opinion is no we do not need drinking in a public park period.
April 24, 2008
7:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
holekeeper writes:
happymike44,
um since the drinking had been allowed for a while so I think you may be wrong. Its not for sitting around getting hammered, Its a controlled enviornment, that is why you need a permit. thanks for reading!