Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper has received sharp criticism for his misguided Sept. 28 letter outlining his views on the controversy surrounding the annual Columbus Day parade.
Given the letter’s quality, he deserves much more.
It would have been appropriate for the mayor to state city policy regarding this year’s parade. Instead, Hickenlooper lectured both sides on a variety of topics that have nothing to do with the city’s obligation to enforce the law.
It would have been nice if he had simply said the city plans to enforce new ordinances passed this summer designed to prevent the disruption of the parade. Such a statement would have put the opponents of the parade on notice that there was a higher personal risk to disruptive acts. Mysteriously, the mayor failed to even mention the ordinance in the letter.
Instead, he recited his views on the First Amendment, opined on how Italian-Americans may feel about the holiday, and repeated his support for the Four Directions/All Nations March that precedes the Columbus Day parade.
It is clear that Hickenlooper to this day doesn’t understand why the letter was offensive. After the initial criticism, he had the nerve to say that he was sorry the two sides to the dispute had taken offense, adding that their reaction distracted “the conversation from the goal of eventual resolution.”
This controversy, the mayor’s attitude notwithstanding, is not a dispute about what color to paint the walls at city hall. In that situation, it might make sense to propose green as a compromise between those who want blue and those who prefer yellow.
The mayor, however, isn’t an interior decorator and this is not an occasion for compromise. Here, the dispute is quite straightforward: One group in the community wants to parade; the other group wants to stop it.
It should not be difficult to pick a side in this fight, yet Hickenlooper seems incapable of doing so. His letter contains a long section lamenting the cost of ensuring public safety. He also whines on about the tight budget times in which we live and speaks of how programs to support youth could be financed with those public safety funds that will now be devoted to the parade.
The most quoted section of the letter, in fact, deals with the cost of providing this protection. “I am sick and tired of this costly, frustrating and potentially dangerous situation that does nothing but generate ill will,” he said.
Yet, incredibly, his next sentence reads, “I am happy to help celebrate Italian heritage.”
So, which is it, Mr. Mayor? Are you “happy” or are you “sick”?
Ordinary mortals can’t so easily have it both ways. Those who wish to celebrate “Italian heritage” (the politically correct term for what is involved in Columbus Day) want to hold a parade. The issue here for the mayor and the city he represents is whether, in peace, they may do so?
It is absolutely useless, under these circumstances, for the city’s top official to respond to the question by saying, “Sure, you can do it, but we wish you wouldn’t.” Or, “Sure you can do it, but we sure regret having to pay for it.” Or, “Sure you can do it, but you are creating ‘community anguish.”‘
The mayor needs to be told that he is creating “community anguish” by writing a letter that so fundamentally misunderstands and mistakes what is at stake in this long-running controversy.
The mayor, in fact, notes at the close of his letter that it is “easy to see how this has become an intractable situation over the last two decades.” What he plainly doesn’t see, however, is that this controversy has become “intractable” because the city has for 15 years has been cowardly in fulfilling its responsibility. It is cowardly still.
While it has made arrests of those who disrupted the parade in the past, it has failed to deliver punishment.
His letter is practically a clarion call for the protesters to show up again this year. He can say, as he has, that no one has a right to disrupt the parade, but given the dithering quality of his leadership, who would believe him?
Al Knight of Fairplay (alknight@mindspring.com) is a former member of The Post’s editorial-page staff. His columns appear on Wednesday.
