A developer is seeking to tear down these homes owned by James Sonnleitner in the 2300 block of Eliot Street in Denver’s Jefferson Park neighborhood. City Councilman Rafael Espinoza filed a historic designation application for the home on the left. (Jon Murray, The Denver Post)
As expected, the Denver Board of Ethics on Friday that urges City Councilman Rafael Espinoza to consider recusing himself from voting on a hostile landmark designation for which he was among the applicants.
But with , Espinoza’s intention remains unclear.
He told me Friday afternoon that he has decided whether he will participate in a discussion and vote set for Wednesday in the Neighborhoods and Planning Committee, for which he is vice chair. But he’s not ready to say yet. He wants to confer with others first, including an assistant city attorney, before stating his intention, he said.
Denver City Councilman Rafael Espinoza. (Campaign photo)
“I know what I’m going to do, but I need to do it in a very particular way,” Espinoza said. “I don’t know if I can do it in that way.”
He also disputed that his ultimate view on the preservation matter has been decided, despite his joining the group that filed the application in late May — before he took office — for the home at 2329 Eliot St. Espinoza paid the $875 filing fee. He said he would be able to weigh the issue fairly if he votes.
A developer wants to tear down the 1880s Queen Anne-style house to make way for townhomes, and homeowner Jim Sonnleitner is fighting the landmark designation, since it would prevent the demolition. Sonnleitner has said Adams Development has offered him $1 million for the house and another he owns next door that is not under consideration for designation.
The ethics board found that Espinoza wouldn’t be prevented by the ethics code from voting. But Chairman Brian Spano’s letter urges him to consider holding back.
“Although you have no apparent personal or financial interest in the subject property and may be reflecting the desires of your constituents, the unique circumstances of this matter and your personal involvement in the landmark application suggest that the ultimate interests of your constituents and the public-at-large may best be served by your abstention from any ultimate vote on landmark designation,” the letter says. “In the final analysis, this is a matter of personal conscience and ethos upon which you must ultimately rest your decision.”
Espinoza says he draws a distinction between filing the application and actually designating it as historic, as the council is now being asked to decide. The application simply signaled that he thought the home was worthy of consideration for historic status, he said. This month, .
“I have not at all made a determination on that,” Espinoza said. “The application and the designation, to me, are very different things,” he said. “It’s one thing to start the process and another thing to conclude the process.”
If he participated in the vote, Espinoza said, he would take into account any input Sonnleitner provides to the council, public testimony and all other information received.
Some observers might be skeptical. Indeed, Espinoza sent an e-mail to the ethics board’s director Friday afternoon to take issue with characterizations in its advisory opinion that stated he has supported the designation.
He contends that’s not so and says he’s ready to give it a fair hearing — if he participates in the council’s votes in coming weeks, starting with Wednesday’s committee hearing.
Another ethics opinion issued
The Board of Ethics also , the city’s new executive director of the Department of Parks and Recreation. She also is an at-large member of the Denver Public Schools board, serving as president, and is seeking re-election Nov. 3.
Citing identical service on the DPS board by previous parks directors, the board urged Haynes to designate decisions on matters involving DPS to a parks staff member. She has said she plans to do so.
Regarding the time demands of both positions, the board also urged Haynes to maintain detailed records and documentation accounting for time spent on DPS matters. The ethics board urged her to consider abstaining from being considered for any officer positions on the school board, including president, if she’s re-elected.
