A group of citizens is drafting an initiative for next spring’s Denver municipal election that could force the city’s mayoral appointees to live within city limits. (Helen H. Richardson, The Denver Post)
Re: “A step too far on Denver residency requirement,” Nov. 17 editorial.
As a proponent of the residency requirement for top Denver officials, I read The Postap editorial opposing this proposed requirement with puzzlement. The Post noted that several senior mayoral appointees are non-residents: the city’s top lawyer; the person responsible for the city’s development and quality of life; the mayor’s top adviser; and the fire chief. The Post also explained why top policy makers should reside in Denver. Nevertheless, The Post concluded that residency be “an informal criteria” that should be “weighted heavily” by the mayor.
The roster of non-resident, high-level appointees demonstrates the current mayor has paid too little attention to this criterion. Thus, the law should require Denver residency for: the mayor’s cabinet; appointed leaders of other city departments and agencies; and the fire and police chiefs.
Top city decision-makers should have the same levels of commitment to and investment in the city as do Denver citizens who are affected by their decisions.
Robert L. Connelly Jr., Denver
This letter was published in the Nov. 20 edition.
Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
