Thursday, September 2, 2010
Click for Denver, Colorado Forecast
Search

CSU

Paramount

Facebook

Downtown Denver Partnership

Nuggets

 

Park plan pooped out?

Idea to put dog waste dispensers in parks put on indefinite hold

Gene Davis, DDN Staff Writer

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

 


After getting the initial go-ahead from Denver Parks and Recreation and investing almost $100,000 of his life savings into his new business, the 31-year-old founder of Poo Free Parks — a company that would have installed advertiser-supported dog waste dispensers in Denver parks at no cost to the taxpayer — says he has been told by the city department’s head, who previously signed a draft contract approving the idea, that the plan is now on indefinite hold.  

Denver Parks and Recreation Manager Kevin Patterson’s office told Poo Free Parks (PFP) founder Bill Airy in May that “it is safe to proceed spending money on supplies in order to get the project moving forward,” according to Airy. The city department originally planned on allowing PFP to install, maintain and service dog waste dispensers in up to 10 Denver parks.  The installations would have been part of a pilot program that, if deemed successful, could have been expanded citywide. 

“I thought it was the perfect plan to provide jobs and clean up the parks and further Denver’s image of being a green-oriented community,” Airy said. “This is my way of giving back to my community, and I’ve been through the ringer. I never, ever thought in one million years that this would have been an issue.”

Denver Parks and Recreation yesterday said in a statement that the draft contract and proposal are now on hold. At a Parks and Recreation advisory board meeting held earlier this month, the board — which previously recommended moving forward with the pilot program — recommended revising the current sponsorship policy, as advised by the City Attorney prior to implementing new programming ideas like PFP.  

Although Patterson signed a draft contract with Airy, he didn’t sign the final draft of the contract. Additionally, several other community leaders — including Mayor John Hickenlooper — also had to sign off on the idea before it became official.

“It’s just not important enough to the city as other things are,” said Airy.


Opposition

Larry Ambrose of the Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation (INC) led the opposition against PFP. Ambrose and several other INC members argued that allowing advertisers to put their slogans on the dog waste dispensers could lead to a slippery slope of widespread advertising in the parks, which is against the city charter. 

“You might as well start putting up billboards, painting ads on the walking paths and putting signs on the trees,” said INC member Dave Felice last month.

However, Airy said that the contract made it clear that there is “no possible way for the slippery slope” to happen. City Attorney Patrick Wheeler seemingly backed his claim, saying in a memorandum to Patterson that the program would be acceptable under the city charter’s sponsorship policy, though he recommended that the city review that policy.

Airy said that in his opinion, Ambrose and select INC members have made it their mission to distort the truth about PFP. He added that their stance was not the norm, and that almost everyone he talked with was on his side.

“These guys go way overboard, not because they are trying to further a cause, or because they believe in something that they want to see in their community, but because they’re against certain things, whatever those things may be,” he said. “There’s no rhyme and there’s no reason.”

 For his part, Ambrose said that he and his associates are not “jumping up and down with joy” now that PFP has seemingly been killed. He said it’s now time for the INC to follow through with their proposal to Denver Parks and Recreation to conduct a public awareness campaign on responsible dog ownership. 

The INC could fill existing containers with recycled bags, add containers with bags where necessary, and persuade dog owners to clean up after their dogs, he said. A meeting between the INC and Denver Parks and Recreation had not been made as of yesterday afternoon.

“We’ve got our work cut out for us now,” he said. “We said we had an alternative, and we’re prepared to move forward with that.”

Meanwhile, Airy is talking with other cities that have expressed interest in PFP. He hopes that he will be able to put to use the 225 dispensers, 400 signs, three crates full of biodegradable bags and dozens of other tools he was hoping to utilize in Denver. 

“I’m hurt, I’m financially in a bad spot. I’ve got a 19-month-old baby here and my wife and I and we’re stuck in a bad economy,” he said. “Here I am taking a risk on my city… and I’ve got almost every dime I’ve ever saved up spent on this project, and now it’s sitting in the garage.” 

 

Comments:
GladysKravitz @ 2009-08-25 11:04:46This whole affair was mishandled from the start on the part of both parties. First with the City of Denver, City Atty and Parks and Rec Dept for their incompetence and misreading of the city charter. Further, Kevin Patterson’s notion that he can simply authorize a free business give-away and the City of Denver not receive any monetary share in return is ridiculous. There was never going be any revenue share from PFP’s ad sales in our parks, nor was PFP going to have to pay any vendor fees, license fees, or leasing fees to city for the privilege to run his business in our parks. PFP’s stood to make $375k in it’s first year alone while Denver got zilch, during a $120m fiscal deficit crisis. And as for whatever cost saving this would have had for Denver; there was never a pro-forma statement issued by Parks & Rec either nor proper calling of bids. For Mr. Airy’s foibles, whatever costs he’s invested are his and his alone as well as his losses. Nice idea for entrepreneurship, but the deal breaker went further than just ads in the park and the fiscal inequity to Denver. Mr. Airy’s exhibited profound CHUTZPAH in his promotion, branding his car(s) and signage with the City of Denver and Parks and Recreation logos without permission, as if to indicate this was already a program of and sanctioned by the City and County of Denver. It was not a done deal. In his ramp-up, he constantly violated city ordinance by placing his lawn signs IN THE PARKS, without permission and along right-of-ways. His over-ambition got the best of him which turned people off. The whole notion of poo in the parks and responsible owners cleaning up after themselves is subjective. PFP would not change behavior of the irresponsible dog owner. And it goes well beyond our parks. Dog owners should always have bags with them from the moment they step off their porch, on their way to and from the park to begin with.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Ted @ 2009-08-25 12:26:18I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice the humor in the subtitle of this article..... Were they really thinking of putting "dog waste dispensers" in the parks? I think there is enough poop there already.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
John Q. Public @ 2009-08-25 13:41:59This article only shows that the Denver Daily News fell for the Bill Airy con game. How about some homework? Did you come up with “Life savings” after researching his finances, or is that what he told you? Have you looked into the professional fraud Airy engages on at www.boostmyscore.net (further contribution to the Nation’s mortgage crisis), the legality of placement of signs in parks, public ROW’s and DPS property, advertising his plans, the foolishness of spending $100,000.00 (a number which is unproven) without a signed contract (duh, he did it as his own risk hoping for substantial profits, if you proceed with funding a plan on a verbal go-ahead, you do at your own risk. That’s why there are contracts), the threats he publicly made to "get" Larry Ambrose (who by the way was just one of MANY people who saw the load of poop Airy was dumping on Denver) and the many people who opposed this scheme, his driving around in a silver Toyota Pruis (just like the city cars) emblazoned with the City of Denver and Parks Department logo (can you saw intentionally trying to confuse). Did you ask Patterson if he really said that to Airy? And by the way, has it ever been proven (1) that there is a poop problem where he proposed signs and (2) that having bags vs. lazy owners was the issue? Nope. Airy is a confrontational distortionist, but this time he was stopped. It was Airy’s stink (him, not the poo) that derailed his scheme. Denver Daily news – you got suckered too! Bill Airy is a good con artist – beware. Or, is Gene in on the con?
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
GladysKravitz @ 2009-08-25 16:22:04I walk Sloans Lake frequently with my dog, and frankly, dog waste is hardly apparant. What is noticeable is the duck and goose droppings throughout the park...which is normal, and expected at parks with bodies of water, yet hardly cleaned up. So all this stuff about blaming the dogs is neglegent. It's about responsibility and ettiquette. This was nothing more than a bright eyed businessman trying to turn a buck using our parks as his profit center without sharing a dime with the parks/people of Denver.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Three Dog Owner @ 2009-08-25 18:39:40My neighborhood was targeted as one of the pilot areas for the PFP scheme. Mr. Airy never spoke with anyone in the neighborhood association, he never tried to contact anyone in the neighborhood and when confronted with the fact he proposed to put EIGHT of the advertising bag dispensers in a ONE ACRE park here, he blamed it on a parks and rec supervisor'r recommendation. This was just one of the many holes in the PFP proposal. The lack of the clear correlation between bag dispensers and people picking up poop was always present and never properly addressed. When asked what "success would look like" for this pilot program (which like many pilots in Denver, seem to never go away after they are started), Parks & Rec staff answered that calls to 311 requesting bags would be an indicator that the program was working. Huh? I would think empty bag dispensers would mean that they were not being refilled reliably by Mr. Airy's company! At the heart of the issue was always the fact that we don't want ADVERTISING in our parks. Mr. Airy's plan wanted the maximum size of sign with a big space for logos that would literally scream at whoever was walking by--whether they had a dog or not--and did not address any kind of educational component for WHY poop needs to be picked up. As an entrepreneur, Mr. Airy took a risk and it did not pay off. He is welcome to take his idea elsewhere and I will be one of the responsible pet owners in my neighborhood supporting INC's proposal to let neighborhood members erect and maintain dog poop bag dispensers.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Geez @ 2009-08-25 21:19:35I've only been without poop bags once for my dogs, but it was frustrating to think that other city parks were well stocked when mine wasn't. I'd love to see someone stock those and maybe citizens can step up now to do that. But a lot of crazy stuff has been said. I lived in Sloans and hated the dog & goose poop but I also went to a neighborhood meeting and liked those people less. I've heard some of those crazies were caught on camera stealing signs from this guys business. The meeting I went to they were ranting about the city lying about water issues, so I believe they' go overboard as one person commented at the INC. This is all crazy talk. It sounds like the city gave permission but then took it back and this guy invested money when he shouldn't have and the neighborhood bullies say they're speaking for everyone when they're not. Sound like everyone involved shares the blame for this guy losing money.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Yente @ 2009-08-26 11:42:35“City Attorney Patrick Wheeler …….. in a memorandum to Patterson that the program would be acceptable under the city charter’s sponsorship policy, though he recommended that the city review that policy.” Here’s what the charter says: 2.4.5 Sale and leasing of parks Without the approval of a majority of those registered electors voting in an election held by the City and County of Denver, no park or portion of any park belonging to the city as of December 31, 1955, shall be sold or leased at any time...provided however, the property in parks may be leased for park purposes to concessionaires, to charitable or NON-PROFIT organizations, or to governmental jurisdictions. All such leases shall require the APPROVAL OF COUNCIL, as provided for in Article III of this Charter... Parks and Rec and Mr. Wheeler erred. Any business in the parks requires a lease, and approval of council. And if Mr. Wheeler suggests a review of the policy/charter, then it further bolsters the argument against the PFP fiasco. Kevin Patterson was prepared to simply give our parks away to a for-profit venture, without fiscal remuneration in return. Again, with apologies of belaboring the point, how on earth can we allow our city to give away any business rights in our parks, when we are trying to settle a $120m deficit? No wonder Dennis Gallagher is now auditing all city contracts, 75% of which have moved forward before final review, signature, nor approval. Who the hell is minding the store at Parks and Rec or City Hall?
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Linda Brunn @ 2009-08-26 11:44:15I would like to clarify a few things. First of all, the Sloan's Lake Citizens Group has been around for over 30 years. It is one of the city's oldest neighborhood groups. If the INC doesn't include our group, they should not pretend to speak for all neighborhood groups, as they did at the meeting at Quigg Newton Center on August 13. With regard to the signs, they were not signs promoting Poo Free Parks. They were signs promoting our annual dessert social meeting on August 14. They contained a small Poo Free Parks logo at the bottom because Bill Airy donated the signs to help us get the word out about the location of our dessert social because the wrong location had been printed in Rick Garcia's District 1 newsletter. If some of the signs were placed in inappropriate places, it should have been reported to authorities. Instead the signs were taken. Some of the signs were taken from private property and the Merritt Methodist Church. That does not seem to be rational behavior. Also why is Larry Ambrose so mad at Kevin Patterson? It looks as if Kevin Patterson gave in and let him have his way.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Three Dog Owner @ 2009-08-26 13:05:11I was a speaker at the August meeting of the Parks & Rec Advisory Board meeting. Alot was said ON BOTH SIDES that was a bit over the top. However much, as a simple citizen of Denver, I would like to think that Kevin Patterson changed his mind because of anything that I or even the INC said that night and through other communication media, there was someone or something bigger that changed his mind. According to the article above Kevin Patterson said to Mr. Airy “it is safe to proceed spending money on supplies" in MAY! Besides the issue of whether or not that conversation took place and the fact that the ADV. Board voted in AUGUST to give the go ahead to Kevin, and the contract had yet to appear before City Council, the PFP project probably fell victim to Dennis Gallagher's office stopping all pre-contracted work. Thank goodness! I was present for the discussion about the project late at night by the P&R Adv. Board. The discussion was brief, the materials handed out were barely reviewed and the final vote to "make the signs smaller" was not followed by any additional discussion about how MUCH SMALLER. In a word I was stunned. I appreciate the time and effort citizen volunteers put into Denver's advisory boards for all departments, but to have such a large issue decided in such a hasty manner was disturbing. And to clarify one thing, Larry Ambrose never said he spoke for ALL neighborhoods. He said he represented the INC and their members who were against the plan. There were at least two other neighborhood groups/members who spoke in support of the PFP proposal. Larry may be blunt and at times a little incendiary, but he he fairly represented the interests of INC and those member groups who had spoken to him about their views.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Jesus Christ @ 2009-08-26 17:24:45Linda, Linda, Linda....please stop with the intellectual dishonestly. SLCG chooses NOT to be a member of the INC. If you felt slighted for not being informed, than join INC. And if you cared that much about PFP, you could have shown up at Quigg Newton on 8/13 to voice your support. Mind you all of, save for myself and two others who spoke against the PFP program were reps of various neighborhood groups (RNO’s), as well as the INC, which exponentially outnumbered the individuals who supported Mr. Airy. Just because SLCG has been around 30 years doesn’t necessarily give you any more credibility or integrity. Case in point: Your dessert event was well branded with a large PFP logo, and the entire purpose of your event was to front for PFP. SLCG simply pimped itself out just like it did at the Dragon Boat Festival, which was a violation of both the event and park rules regarding for-profit companies in the parks. You did not consult Dragon Boat coordinators that you were going to allow PFP to piggyback on your free booth space. And thus PFP was asked to leave by the Dragon Boat managers and the police. I live in the Sloan’s Lake neighborhood and choose not to belong to your cabal because its leadership is made of the same old miscreants and curmudgeons whose time has passed and think they are still relevant. And last of all, stop posting your vitriol using Larry Ambrose’s and other people’s names. Anyone can post stuff using aliases. And they can be deleted too. Check out my non-de-plume. Yours truly, the Lord! statements. Your dessert event was well branded with a large PFP logo, and the entire purpise of the signs was not for your event, but for PFP to promote itself. SLCG simply pimped itself out for PFP just like it did at the Dragon Boat Festival, which was a violation of the booth rules, and park rules about for-profit companies doing biz in the parks.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Jesus Christ @ 2009-08-26 17:39:14BTW Linda: regarding your signs, you said "They were signs promoting our annual dessert social meeting on August 14.They contained a small Poo Free Parks logo at the bottom because Bill Airy donated the signs to help us get the word out". Just another example how SLCG allowed it's "good" name to be used in violation of park rules, as YOUR signs were plunged throughout and within Sloans Lake (inside the park walk-ways) and along ROWs in the nieghborhood. As one of the oldest groups in Denver you should know better than to break the law. You bear just as much culpability.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Larry Ambrose @ 2009-08-26 17:57:36Comments since removed from this page attributed to me were posted under my name by someone seemingly close to the Poo Free Parks cause in order to inflame City officials and defame my name and that of my wife who was falsely accused of wrongdoing by Mr. Bill Airy but never arrested. Please be assured, I would never write, utter or even think such vitriolic commentary. Although people may chose to disagree about issues, those of us who spend many volunteer hours on civic matters, do not do so for malicious reasons, for personal attention or financial gain. We do so, not because we hear no rhyme nor think no reason, but because we sometimes respond either positively or negatively to matters which we believe strike a civic chord and sooth or shock our individual and collective sensibilities. Democracy and our republic thrive because people are willing to endorse, either loudly or benignly, or step up and object reasonably and peacefully, to what is being done or proposed. We respect and applaud the government employees who conscientiously and faithfully perform their duties in the best interests of the citizenry. Occasionally, incompetence, corruption or arrogance can creep into any kind of institution, public, private or even philanthropic. People of good faith should value an aware, concerned and involved citizenry, a vibrant free press and responsible government oversight as essential elements of our society. From: Larry Ambrose
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Linda Brunn @ 2009-08-26 19:20:17First of all, I am relieved that Larry Ambrose did not post that first comment. I thought he had lost his mind to say such ridiculous things. I am sorry if someone put that in to malign him, and I definitely disapprove of such tactics. I assure you I have no idea who did it. I also want to say that my husband and I did attend the meeting on August 13, but we arrived too late to get to speak. I also want to state that the August 12 SLCG dessert social was not designed to promote Poo Free Parks. Poo Free Parks was not even on the agenda. The only mention of it was a brief announcement about the meeting on August 13. Most of the business of the meeting involved issues at the Autumn Grove Apartments, the presentation of Good Neighbor Awards to police officers, and promoting the Greenprint Denver Canvass on August 15. Most of the evening was devoted to socializing with our neighbors. As for the Dragon Boat Festival, we had no idea that Poo Free Parks was such a controversial issue, and when Mr. Airy volunteered to work at the booth and pass out information, we didn't foresee it being such a problem. My husband worked at the booth all morning and managed to peacefully co-exist with the Sloan's Neighborhood Association. Then when Mr. Airy showed up, Larry Ambrose became quite upset. Harsh words were exchanged on both sides. It was not a pleasant scene so the SLCG chose to leave. I do not claim to speak for the entire SLCG. I am just a member, but I was present at many of the events in question, and I wanted to set the record straight. Obviously, the INC feels that they have some reason to be suspicious of Mr. Airy's motives, but our perception was that his idea seemed to be an innocuous plan to possibly help keep the parks cleaner without costing the city any money.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Moshe Pipik @ 2009-08-27 00:54:53Thanks for clarifying all that stuff Ms. Brunn. Except why were the SLCG signs planted throughout Sloan’s’ Lake Park all around the walk ways and on the grounds of Lake Middle School on 8/12? Something's not adding up. Did Parks and Rec, and DPS give you permission to do so? If so who? For 16 years I was the marketing mgr for two major media corps, and cross promoted with many companies. On many occasions promoters approached us to be sponsors of their events to bolster their credibility. If ever it was found they were using our brand maliciously or unethically, we pulled our support. You just can't admit you've been duped and used by PFP.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam
Stevi Quate @ 2009-08-27 10:03:26I've decided that I will no longer read emails with the silly psedonyms. We need to engage in civil discourse. After all, that's what a democracy is all about. As one reader of this provocative debate, I've decided to skip over all the emails signed by such folks as Jesus Christ, John Q Public, or Citizen Kane. No matter how sound our message is if we don't have the balls to sign names then we're not engaing in civil discourse and I for one don't care to read them.
Flag this comment as Inappropriate / Spam

 

Add a new comment...
Spammers: links do not work and our site gets monitored for spam daily and your comments will be removed -- please do not spam our site!
Your Name:
Your Email:
Title:
Comments:
If you are viewing this page with a screen reader or non-graphical browser, you may manually request registration by contacting us
Please copy the characters from this image into the box below. All characters are either numbers 1-9 (not zero) or letters (upper and lowercase). If you cannot read this image, you can click it to try a different image (most browsers). Otherwise, submit the page anyway and try again.
Image Text:
Liquor Store

AVS

Trinity

Twitter-Daily Deal

AFW