CCNNA Response to Councilman Hinds is described in the following letter: 

Dear Councilman Hinds:

I am writing in response to your comments at City Council on the GLAC, which were repeated in your e-letter, the Perfect 10.  We understand your vote and stated reasons therefor.  However, we at the Cherry Creek North Neighborhood Association (“CCNNA”) feel it necessary to comment on your statements about the District 10 survey.  

In your comments you stated and wrote: “Some said they didn’t want to complete the survey because of the questions I asked.  They said the questions were biased.  They said the questions were invasive.  So, these groups decided against participating in my survey and created their own survey.  That is, of course, their prerogative to go separately from the District-wide survey.  But here’s the deal, I was trying to cut through the misinformation and preconceptions and make sure people were thinking about the policy, not just reciting talking points.  

I also wanted to see if this amendment could actually be that affordability tool that CPD strives for.  That means I asked about financial stability.  "It meant asking about social networks.  If they were stable, and their social network was stable, well then, this amendment isn’t for you.  If you are severely cost burdened, or if your social network was housing insecure, then the amendment is meant for you.”   

The D10 survey questions drilled down on who had large houses, more garage spaces than cars and other questions which were apparently posed to determine which parts of District 10 were housing secure and which were not.  And the conclusion was that the GLAC is not meant for those who are housing secure.  Yet many residents feel that this major zoning amendment will impact their lives, whether or not the amendment was “meant for them”.  

Many RNO leaders and members took a tremendous amount of time to (i) read, decipher and understand the amendment and how it would impact our neighborhood (not just reciting talking points); (ii) communicate that information to residents, (iii) obtained feedback from residents on the GLAC in a straight-forward way and (iv) communicate that feedback to you.  Over 450 people in CCNNA participated in the CCNNA effort and we provided those opinions to you and the other members of City Council.  The official position of CCNNA (with which the majority of CCNNA residents who responded to our outreach) DID support the Household Definition of 5 unrelated adults, but had issues with the remaining portions of the legislation and requested that the legislation be broke out into different efforts so that Congregate Living and Residential Care could be discussed with additional provisions which could better protect neighborhoods.  

The intent of the City’s RNO ordinance is expressly to allow the flow of information to neighborhoods and then to “enable such organizations to present their positions before certain decisions affecting their neighborhoods are made by agencies and departments of the city.”  CCNNA, as the official RNO for the CCN neighborhood, presented its position with a lot of detailed information, including the responses from more than 450 residents.  The education and outreach efforts of CCNNA was in line with the RNO Ordinance cited above. To be overlooked for this approach, as opposed to those who took the D10 survey, was not respectful of those many efforts and opinions delivered to you by CCNNA.  

Councilman Hinds, you have said that we are ALL in this together.  As such, we must ALL work together to support, fight for and fund efforts to find solutions to address homelessness issues, affordability, equity and justice in housing and related legislation. Dividing along ‘secure’ living lines will not help to unite residents in finding real solutions to the difficult issues Denver faces as it continues to address the challenges growth brings to our community.

We respectfully ask for your help in allowing ALL citizens of District 10 to be able to have a voice in important legislation affecting our community, including as the City moves forward to implement the Group Living amendment.  

The CCNNA Board of Directors