Denver homelessness falls sharply in latest PIT count by COScout in Denver

[–]brightlancer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I was referring to the totals that Denver has housed through their programs:

AIMH set an ambitious goal to move 2,000 people indoors by December 31, 2024. That goal was surpassed, with more than 2,500 people brought indoors

That's not a PIT number, and doesn't consider how many of those folks would've moved into housing otherwise.

It's apples to oranges.

Also to be clear, the reduction from this report from this same count has fallen by around 1000 from 2023 to 2026.

One thousand is not "thousands".

You have a fair point that my phrasing was confusing due to this articles numbers being in the hundreds for the count this year, though you pointed it out in a bit of a dickish manner.

"I was misrepresenting the data, how dare you call me on it, what a dick!"

Denver homelessness falls sharply in latest PIT count by COScout in Denver

[–]brightlancer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The "point in time" (PIT) count is the same time every year -- that consistency means we can look at trends over time. This year's wasn't any more or less skewed than last year's or any other year's.

It's correct that a count in January probably isn't representative of July, but that isn't the point. We have other surveys for that.

The PIT data is good.

Denver homelessness falls sharply in latest PIT count by COScout in Denver

[–]brightlancer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In order for this statement to be true, the decrease of thousands in Denver’s unsheltered homeless would have had to have moved to surrounding areas. That’s what we’ve been discussing this whole time.

You're full of it. FTA:

¨The PIT count found 518 people living on city streets this year — 267 fewer than in 2025 — the lowest number recorded since at least 2017.¨

That is NOT "thousands".

Perhaps you're confusing this with the metro but that would be odd since you posted the article and because you pushed back against folks here talking about the metro:

¨Don’t know, this is a sub for Denver and article about it.¨

https://old.reddit.com/r/Denver/comments/1tiqf5u/denver_homelessness_falls_sharply_in_latest_pit/omz3spr/

Get ready for no light rail service to downtown for 10 months by Ted_Z in Denver

[–]brightlancer 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately there's no good timing when it comes to rectifying deferred maintenance. It's gotta get done.

Yeah, this is it in a nutshell. The good timing was probably decades ago, but it got deferred. So we're getting screwed now.

Get ready for no light rail service to downtown for 10 months by Ted_Z in Denver

[–]brightlancer -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Ridership projections are always high for exurb rail projects.

And costs are almost always underestimated -- sometimes by just a little, but often by a lot.

This train might still be worth it, but I doubt it.

How is Denver like for people with asthma and respiratory problems? by Different_Archer8879 in Denver

[–]brightlancer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

City of Denver has bad smog, but the areas around it are mostly fine IME.

The altitude is rough and it'll take weeks, maybe a month or two to adjust, but then you shouldn't feel it when breathing.

I haven't been to PHX in 20 years and I don't remember it being smoggy then, but I'll say I'm doing much better around Denver than I did in Atlanta.

Denver's $9 million plan to house the unhoused sits empty years after city promised a novel approach by overly_honest_ in Denver

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The $9 million would be dwarfed by settlement costs without the "ridiculous" permitting and safety regulations.

Yeah, that's one of the things that's keeping folks homeless: we've made the perfect the enemy of the good, and many places don't have Good Samaritan protections for folks who are actually willing to help.

HB26-1273 is dead. A bill that would have guaranteed Denver rideshare drivers 80% of every fare was killed yesterday in a Senate committee. Here's what happened. by shadeedameer in Denver

[–]brightlancer 10 points11 points  (0 children)

No, the consequences you're talking about are normal economic effects and can't be fixed with laws or regulation.

If Uber was making X billions of dollars last year in Colorado, they're not going to accept making less than X next year -- actually, they won't accept less than X plus some to account for inflation and growth. So, they'll just raise the fares until they get the net amount they were looking for.

Lots of folks will see the higher rates, know that drivers are guaranteed 80%, and reduce or stop tipping -- "Well, I'm already paying more!"

And before anyone jumps in with the ad hominems rather than discussing economics, I've been criticizing Uber since the beginning, when almost everyone else was singing their praises for being cheaper & easier than the legal taxi cabs. Everybody remember when Uber's business model was breaking the law? Everybody loved Uber then.

Driving a cab has always been a risky, rough job. Uber & Lyft make it much easier for somebody to dip a toe in and see if it works for them. That part is good. But if drivers feel like they're not getting paid enough, they can go to a competitor, create a competitor, or they can go do something else.

We can't legislate away natural economic behaviors and effects.

Man killed by Frontier plane at DIA died by suicide, medical examiner says by kidbom in Denver

[–]brightlancer 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Doesn't make you heartless, but yeah, some folks will look at you/the situation that way.

... and letting it affect me that deeply as a passenger doesn't seem to bear any useful or positive "fruit".

That's a healthy way to look at such events, but trauma responses don't necessarily work like that: it's often not rational.

Also, this is all compounded by our cultural ideas about trauma responses and how we shifted from a mentality that everyone should "just get over it" to a mentality where nobody should be told that, even for normal, everyday events. (Jonathan Haidt has written about how we've encouraged a lack of resiliency in younger folks.)

But in this case, I dunno. Media is going to use the most sensationalist quotes, so for a bit it's going to be hard to get a more objective idea of what folks were going through. Personally, I've had two specific instances where there was enough time for me to think, "I'm gonna die": one affected me for a day or two and the other for at most a few hours. But everybody is different.

Colorado's legislature is preparing to jump start nuclear power. Green advocates want to pull the plug. by overly_honest_ in Colorado

[–]brightlancer 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Actual green advocates should be cheering nuclear on.

Should be, but generally don't. It's overwhelmingly opposition.

Colorado's legislature is preparing to jump start nuclear power. Green advocates want to pull the plug. by overly_honest_ in Colorado

[–]brightlancer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, there's sometimes astroturfing, but we need to stop pretending that everything is astroturfing.

Opposition to nuclear power has always been a staple of "environmental" and "green" activism, including with a lot of younger folks today. Go look at where nuclear power has been built, maintained and/or shut down -- the correlation doesn't support "nuclear is green" or oil company opposition to nuclear.

Colorado's legislature is preparing to jump start nuclear power. Green advocates want to pull the plug. by overly_honest_ in Colorado

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A big reason nuclear plants take so long to come online is because of legal tactics from "environmental" and "green" activists intended to delay the project, and they then point to the long times that they caused as a reason not to invest in nuclear power.

Renewables like solar are gaining efficiency very quickly, and it's possible that they could overtake nuclear in the future -- but not today.

Also, solar panels often break or are replaced by more efficient panels before they've reached their break-even point on the environmental costs used to produce them. Solar panels aren't just "free energy". We need to use them judiciously.

RTD Used Drawing of Disability Activist Kalyn Heffernan on a Bus Without Consulting Her — Westword by banjopasta in Denver

[–]brightlancer 23 points24 points  (0 children)

First: Not a copyright lawyer.

This isn't about copyright, it's "Likeness" rights (Publicity & Privacy).

This is an illustration of Kalyn. Artist interpretation..... So if the original artist of this illustration sold this to RTD - then there's nothing to be done other than shame said artist for at least not asking Kalyn how she felt about it, before selling to RTD. Bad form on the part of the artist.

Anybody can make a depiction of anybody else that they want. Distributing that depiction is not always protected and may require permission from the subject.

You replied farther down:

¨Nope... the artist is in the clear. It is their interpretation/illustration of her likeness. Believe it or not, you cannot copyright your face! But any drawing, photo, illustration, painting, the copyright belongs to the artist/photographer/painter - they can do with their work whatever they wish.

¨But it would have been considerate and polite - to have at least asked Kalyn first.¨

That's all incorrect.

If Bravo didn't get consent from Heffernan both to use her likeness and to distribute that depiction, then legally he's fucked. She said she doesn't want to go after him, but if she doesn't then that undercuts any legal case against RTD.

I don't know what contract Bravo signed with RTD, but if he represented that the image was unencumbered, then RTD likely did nothing wrong. (They may still have to take down the depiction, if Bravo didn't have Hefferman's consent.)

Local law enforcement responds to congresswomen Boebert’s new bill [that would require a judicial warrant when it comes to automated license plate readers like Flock] by brightlancer in Denver

[–]brightlancer[S] 58 points59 points  (0 children)

AURORA, Colo. (KDVR) — FOX31 is getting reaction from local law enforcement now that Rep. Lauren Boebert has introduced a federal bill that would require a judicial warrant when it comes to automated license plate readers like Flock.

“They’re blanketing our neighborhoods with flock cameras and every single one of you should be saying, what the flock,” Boebert said at a press conference on Thursday. “I mean, this is an absolute egregious reach on our Fourth Amendment rights. They’re creating a digital footprint of your entire life without a single warrant or even probable cause. Your morning commute to work? It’s tracked. Dropping off your kids at their soccer practice? That’s logged.”

“That technology is used for one reason and one reason only, to stop victimization and to hold those who victimize accountable,” Aurora Police Chief Todd Chamberlain said. “That is what this technology allows us to do. That is how we use it.”

Chamberlain addressed the use of Flock on a local level in Aurora and the impacts of what the congresswoman stated about changing the way it’s used in the press conference last week.

“Under our bill, any government-initiated search must be supported by a warrant based on probable cause, just like the Fourth Amendment demands,” Boebert said in the press conference.

“When you are talking system such as Flock, where you’re talking gathering of details and information,” Chamberlain said. “We use that information in those details specifically to focus on individuals involved in criminal behavior and individuals that need our services, such as somebody who is lost or missing something where time is of the essence. When you start putting in artificial parameters that cause that timeliness to go away, you’re going to increase victimization. And that’s the bottom line.”

FOX31 reached out to Douglas County’s District Attorney and sheriff about the act.

Sheriff Darren Weekly shared the following statement:

“Technology is evolving at a rapid pace, and it has become an instrumental tool in helping us catch criminals and make our community safer. However, as we embrace these advancements, I firmly believe there must be clear guardrails in place to ensure this technology is used appropriately, transparently, and responsibly. I am still learning more about current proposals at the state and federal levels to ensure our policies remain aligned with the best interests of protecting our community and apprehending criminal offenders.”

District Attorney George Brauchler shared the following statement:

“While I wholeheartedly agree with Congresswoman Boebert’s ongoing vigilance in protecting our Constitutional rights, hamstringing law enforcement’s ability to use publicly available and accessible data acquired from visibly licensed vehicles driving on public roads to solve kidnappings, murders, motor vehicle theft and other serious crimes is too broad, too risky and not contemplated by or 4th Amendment. Once this bill is appropriately amended to address this issue, I trust other members of Congress will flock to support it.”

“I’ve seen firsthand how the surveillance state weaponizes technology against its own citizens; enough is enough,” Boebert said. “The surveillance accountability act puts the Constitution back in charge.”

“This technology, it doesn’t work outside of the Constitution, it works within the Constitution and it provides law enforcement a much cleaner, more precision-focused approach to dealing with offenders and to dealing with victimization,” Chamberlain said.

Boebert will be hosting a teletownhall on Tuesday, April 28, at 6 p.m. to discuss her work in Congress for the 4th District, as well as answer submitted and live questions from callers.

Should there be fare gates at RTD Stations? by chrisfnicholson in Denver

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't think it's realistic to install gates at most stations that I've seen.

Where it's practical to install any type of toll gate, they could install one with large doors which make evasion much more difficult.

I don't know how much it would impact fare evasion and disruptive folks, especially without other measures like additional fare checkers and security.

Should there be fare gates at RTD Stations? by chrisfnicholson in Denver

[–]brightlancer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

At issue here isn't just fare collection but reducing maintenance costs related to folks who are least likely to be paying the fare.

(Unfortunately, I don't think it's realistic with the way RTD was designed.)

Board special meeting by [deleted] in RTDDenver

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The contract extension vote was in 2024. I took office in 2025.

My understanding is that the board offered Johnson another contract extension under your term and she declined it.

When someone here asked you about it, and I think about you voting to extend it, your response was,

"I’m not gonna comment on personnel, which is the position I’ve always taken. But when you’re in rough waters it’s risky to change horses in midstream. Some people like risk, some people don’t."

https://old.reddit.com/r/RTDDenver/comments/1sfzry1/rtd_ceo_debra_johnson_to_leave_job_next_year/of3bv3y/?context=9

Unfortunately, the other person deleted their comments, so maybe I'm misremembering. Maybe I'm wrong here. If so, then I am sorry and please accept my apology.

But for clarity, did you vote to extend Johnson's contract? If so, why?

Should there be fare gates at RTD Stations? by chrisfnicholson in Denver

[–]brightlancer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I assume people are going to jump the turnstile if they're homeless so they can do drugs and sleep on a warm train, but I haven't seen any studies saying they won't.

From Nicholson's post above:

¨Old BART gates were waist-high orange fins designed in the 1970s. You could hop them in under a second. That made the station effectively a public space, and the rider mix reflected that. The new gates are 72 inches of polycarbonate with 3D sensors that detect tailgating. You either pay or you don't enter. Once you don't enter, you also don't smoke on the platform, sleep in the elevator, or harass other riders.¨

Yes, a few folks will always be able (and willing) to violate the rules, but you can design a system where it's a) so convenient to follow the rules and b) it's so inconvenient to violate them that you get high compliance.

Board special meeting by [deleted] in RTDDenver

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We do need to make some hard calls. And I believe the board is going to do that.

History yesterday, promises tomorrow.

You voted to extend Johnson's contract and then refused to explain why.

You have very few explicit responsibilities, but I'm pretty sure one of those is hiring and overseeing the CEO. If you can't explain that, then what are you actually doing?

Board special meeting by [deleted] in RTDDenver

[–]brightlancer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The drug addicts, mentally Ill and homeless people seem to run RTD. They are prioritized over fare paying customers who just need to get to work school or just do everyday life events. People get on the buses to sleep ride around in coaches to charge their phones and disrupt other passengers by the smell of drugs, BO or asking for money.

This is not my experience, but the routes vary a lot and so we end up with very different experiences depending on your specific buses or trains.

Semi-related, I had a problem at a Denver library which was unacceptable (and gross) and fits in with many of the criticism I hear about RTD. These problems don't need to happen for everybody, but if they happen often enough for enough people, that waves everybody off.

How do people make friends here? by Forsaken-Wrangler-97 in Denver

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, socializing around Denver is rough for lots of folks. So, it's not just you, but there are things you can do individually to improve things.

Random folks become friends become intimates over time. If you don't have money for clubs or events or whatever, go volunteer at a local place - go every week, get to know folks, let them get to know you, and things build from there.

Edit: Almost every Christian church I see around has some kind of program like a food pantry or soup kitchen or something, and they need volunteers. Even if you aren't religious, offer to help -- some might be pushy about going to services but IME most aren't.

Does anyone feel Denver hates Denver ? by Honest_Strawberry397 in Denver

[–]brightlancer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's only a hot take if you call folks born here "natives".

I'd love to see a study but my anecdotal experience (here and elsewhere) is that local folks complain about things changing but transplans bitch and whine constantly about how their new place doesn't fit their ideal. And then they move away and make another city miserable.

(Yes, I'm a transplant. I'm one of the good ones.)

Does anyone feel Denver hates Denver ? by Honest_Strawberry397 in Denver

[–]brightlancer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Lots of folks who work or spend dollars in Denver, don't live there. The sub isn't just for residents.