From Our Mailbox - 2010


December 30, 2010

The paper is a great communication re our community--read it cover to cover and keep it for future reference til the next issue arrives.   It just gets better and better.  Nancee Conant 

December 30, 2010


I think it would be interesting to see an objective (not written by, or sourced directly from any member of the city council) story on the costs and benefits of unincorporation. The city has been in place for a few years now and we have all had a chance to think about the decision we made several years ago to incorporate. While I do not know what would be involved, and certainly do not know what side of the argument I would support, this is an option that should be researched and discussed. As our primary source of community news, the Castle Pines Connection would be an ideal (and hopefully impartial) source of information on this topic.

Howard Cohen

Mr. Cohen,

Thank you for taking the time to submit comment.   I think your idea is a terrific one and one that the community and our readers would enjoy.   The challenge will be gathering all the information and reporting it in a way that informs without influencing opinion either way.  I welcome the challenge.  I hope to have something together for the March issue.

Thanks again for your suggestion,



December 30, 2010

Mayor Huff, Treasurer Shively, Editor Wiebold:

As I read Volume 3, Number 1, January 2011 of the self appointed "Voice of the Castle Pines Community", The Castle Pines Connection, I, in fact, have never felt more disconnected from my community than at any time or any place that I have ever lived. Yes, my wife and I moved to Castle Pines North nearly 7 years ago with a belief that we had traded in our Denver native urban lifestyles, for a better community, one where we could enjoy retirement in a place that we could call home forever.

As one would expect, our home has gas heat and hot water, reliable electricity, the storm sewers drain, the toilets flush and the water tastes satisfactory. No wonder then that is such an easy sell by those providing basic services to think themselves and their assesments as being honest, truthful and justified. I remember, however, that we paid exorbitant transfer fees to as many as 3 Associations at closing just to move here. After a few years, we saw the benefits of moving our community to the next level of self government, and like over 70% of our neighbors in the community, we voted to establish a City. City it is, City it shall be.

Now, beginning another New Year, 2011, I question our decision to continue living in Castle Pines (North). My biggest concern is who's steering the ship. I voted for a Mayor/Council form of government with a City Manager to oversee the day to day operations. But instead of the ship of local government being steered on a steady course through what I would have believed a few years ago, to be calm political and utility service seas, I am convinced that the ship has been Hijacked! Just like Somali pirates, one by one, multiple grappling hooks have been thrown onto the decks of the City, and local pirates are trying desperately to take command of the ship. Why?

Who do we have reporting on these actions? A community newspaper that is unbiased, fair, and honest? Absolutely not! What we have is a newspaper that allows the voice of dissent and negativism to clandestinely report the news that they want the community to hear and with an unending bash of those elected "volunteers" in this City who are trying their honest best to make this City a better place to live. What's the motive? I could understand a place like Chicago, but Castle Pines? Again, Why? 

In the aforementioned edition of The Castle Pines Connection, I am greeted by the ever present photographs of smiling CPNMD board members, some City Officials, and HOA board members who all seem to have the same negative opinion about the future of our city and those elected to operate it and the despicable state of affairs under City leadership. I could write volumes about my concerns for such negativism, but suffice it to say when I read supposition and opinion, in print, from our elected officials, I am more than disgusted.

Mayor Huff, your column reads of the same glitter and fluff one would expect from a campaign, not from a sitting Mayor. Each paragraph contains words like: optimistic, community-focused strategy, attractiveness to upscale homeowners, critical importance of integration, community outreach, restore economic activity. Certainly nothing less than what a Mayor or candidate would be expected to say in print...Mayor, I would love to hear more about your real feelings about integration of services between the CPNMD and the City of Castle Pines. Of course, now that the URA is off the table, much to your satisfaction, it is back to the desperatly needed integration. Ever lurking in the shadows is the future of your own Metro District in Hidden Pointe. The next lawsuit??

Treasurer Shivley (and Editor Wiebold), you say in your opening sentence that you are writing a "series of articles for the The Castle Pines Connection". Please spare me any more of your personal negative observations and editorial perspectivesJust count the money and sign the checks!   Yes, we do have an election in November, and it is too bad that you are not going to be on the ballot yourself. But then again, I imagine that you have your hands full with promoting the CPNMD and Mayor Huff. Yes, you are right there is no free lunch, for most of us, but the next time you are offered one by the CPNMD, please remember your own words.

Editor Wiebold, the only thing I can say to you is WOW. The last time I was as wowed at such a huge color centerfold like the one in this issue of your paper was when I stole my dad's Playboy magazine when I was 12! Have you ever sold such ad space before?  Who paid for that centerfold...and why?  I certainly hope that your readership enjoys priority #3 of CPNMD top 2011 priorities. "Castle Pines' City Council's fiscally irresponsible and materially damaging attempt to dissolve CPNMD"...etc, etc. The only point with 4 major sub points A-D. Of course, #2 the coined phrase "Legacy Debt" point, discussed in such a way that someone who didn't know any better might incorrectly assume that this debt may have been incurred by the City of Castle Pines at some point in time. Your obvious bias against the City is becoming more evident with each issue. You are the Editor, why don't you just come out with an editorial and explain your paper's position of bias.   It is thinly veiled at best now , and your bias is well documented both on and off the record. The balance of your paper is both informative, interesting and pleasant to read. It is too bad that in order to be informed about the community at large I have to swallow a political poison pill with each issue to get to that information. 

The best quote of this latest issue of The Castle Pines Connection, has to go to Jim Steavpack, Director At-Large, CPN Master Association, for his motto: NARFAP or what he calls (Need a Reason For a Party?). Maybe Mayor Huff should council Mr. Steavpack about what the Mayor calls in his Note: "we face the reality of lower than normal levels of economic activity as many businesses and families work to recover lost capital from the financial conditions of the recession" My question to Mr. Steavpack would be, "need to use my Master Association dues (over and above the $70 going to the Parks Authority) for parties"?

To the City of Castle Pines North, the Castle Pines North Metro District, and CPN Master Association I say, Stop wasting my money on lawsuits, legal expenses, and full color print attack ads. Most all of you, and my family, live in Castle Pines for a reason...Quality of Life. We have quality water, we have quality volunteers on our City Council, a handsomely paid Metro District management, good fire and police protection, new parks, a library, and an attentive public works department. So, pull in those grappling hooks, stop the wasteful spending, retire the debt, and encourage economic development. Let's begin anew in 2011 to operate as a conglomeration of ideas, visions, and philosophy that makes this City the star of Douglas County, and the envy of all who would move here. Now that would be something to report in the Connection that we could all support!

Donald Reese
Just plain old citizen


Mr. Reese,

Thank you for your response and for your interest in The Castle Pines Connection. You clearly put a great deal of thought and time into this e-mail, and your opinion is of great interest to me.   I welcome the opportunity to learn more about your views and to further explain the process by which content is submitted to the paper. 

In the meantime, here are some general responses and answers to the questions you asked of me specifically:

I cannot speak to why there is community dissent, other than that I have found it generally starts with a lack of trust.  In any group, organization, municipality or government, there will always be differing opinions; that's the beauty of a democracy.  The Castle Pines Connection is committed to reporting the facts, while allowing for freedom of those differing opinions to be openly expressed on its pages from the individuals who hold the opinion.

You make reference to individuals expressing "negative opinion about the future of our city and those elected to operate it."  Unless I am misunderstanding your reference, each of the individuals and boards you are referring to were elected into the position which they hold.  Not appointed by peers, as some have been, but elected by the citizens in Castle Pines. I encourage citizen participation in the paper, and if elected officials have input, that is welcome as well.

You ask why, as editor, I don't you just come out with an editorial and explain my paper's position of bias.  Citizens are interested in hearing from thier elected officials directly and not my personal take on their comments.  But for clarification, the paper holds no position of bias.  I fully support the city of Castle Pines in its endeavors and I remain committed to helping get city news to the residents in the community.  Including a column from the mayor and the treasurer was an attempt at continuing to maintain communications between elected city officials and the community.  While the city council has allocated funds in the past to purchasing a page in the paper for communicating its news, it chose not to renew the contract with The Castle Pines Connection for 2011 to go in a different direction.  I wish them all the best with their city newsletter.  Since nearly half of the readership of The Castle Pines Connection lives in the City of Castle Pines, communicating city news remains a priority to me.  The city's communications committee has indicated that it will no longer be submitting content to The Castle Pines Connection on a regular basis, so I brought back a section of the paper "City in Review" to cover city issues.   From an editorial perspective, it doesn't get much more transparent than a direct dialogue between the elected city officials and the people.

You asked," Have you ever sold such ad space before [referring to the center two page spread]?  This is the first of hopefully many color spreads featured.  Since our first issue in December 2009, The Castle Pines Connection has been offered to residents in the community FREE of charge.  The paper exists because of local advertisers who support what we are doing.  This is the first time the center spread has been available for purchase, as this is the first time we have printed in color.  The community and our advertisers requested color, so we gave it a try.  The printing process for newspapers requires that pages be printed on plates of four page spreads.  My goal was to have the front page printed in color.  The back page and center spread are on the same plate, so it made sense to feature color on them as well.  I contacted some of our advertisers who have been with us since the first issue and offered them the option of trying color. 

You inquired as to "Who paid for that centerfold...and why?" The Castle Pines North Metropolitan District (CPNMD) purchased the center spread.  The CPNMD has been a financial supporter of The Castle Pines Connection since the very first issue and have purchased a full page in the publication every issue.  I can only speculate as to why, but my hope would be that they see The Castle Pines Connection as a valued, trusted community resource as well as an efficient communication tool to communicate with its constituents in a cost-effective way.

I look forward to our meeting next week to further discuss any additional questions you may have.  Thank you for your input and continued interest in The Castle Pines Connection. 

                                                                 (See additional comments posted in January 2011).

Best wishes for a safe New Year, Terri



December 30, 2010

Is it possible to only get an on-line version of the connection to conserve paper? Carl Lowman

Mr. Lowman,

Thank you for your inquiry regarding conserving paper and only receiving the online version of The Castle Pines Connection monthly publication; it is a very important question. I appreciate your desire to conserve paper. Unfortunately, there is no way to exclude or opt out of receiving the printed version of the paper, as it is mass mailed to the entire zip code. What I can suggest is that when you receive the printed publication, take it with you on your next errand (grocery store, dry cleaners, coffee shop) and leave it for someone who may not live in the zip code and who doesn't receive it in the mail.



December 7, 2010


Got the paper and enjoyed it as always. This time of year I seem to always be l looking for someone/somewhere to do holiday gift wrap. I didn’t see any such advertisers in the paper. Seems to me someone could make a tidy sum by offering the service. If you know of anything I’d appreciate knowing.
Graydon Neher



November 26, 2010

Dear editor,

So here we are, post 2010 election results, and the residents of the northern end of town have a brand new name. Well, sort of new.  The residents of The City of Castle Pines North voted to officially change the name of their hometown to The City of Castle Pines.

I, for one, was in favor of this change.  It seemed like a good idea.  After all, Castle Pines NORTH is a bit long and cumbersome.  Castle Pines as opposed to Castle Rock has a certain eloquence to it.  However, oddly, this change seems to have caused more confusion than anything else.

Who are we exactly now? Are we still Castle Rock 80108?  Well, as far as the post office is concerned, their answer is a resounding yes!  Castle Pines North has never risen to the level of sanctity of the actual mailing envelope nor the return address labels technically.  So if Castle Pines North has not risen to the occasion over the last two years, than you can bet Castle Pines should not be part of your envelope’s façade either.

Now what about just in conversation?  Are we now Castle Pines?  Well, sure we are, we voted it in, right?  Maybe not.; at least not yet.  Signs as you enter the neighborhood still say Castle Pines North.  The Castle Pines North Master Association and Castle Pines North Wine and Spirit don’t intend to change their names.  And why should they?  After all, that would incur additional costs for them and with no real gain for doing so.

And in the epitome of Castle Pines disrespect, as a resident myself who was committed to now calling my residence Castle Pines, was talking to a fellow resident about the Castle Pines Rotary, which meets in Castle Pines Village.  This resident was told that her daughter was not eligible for a scholarship through the Castle Rock Rotary since they were not residents of the Towne of Castle Rock.  She wondered if a Castle Pines Rotary existed.  Well, yes it does, I told her that they meet at the Castle Pines Country Club in Castle Pines Village.  I then asked her if she lived in Castle Pines.  Then immediately realizing that my question was unclear, I added the dreaded “NORTH” to my question. 

Now I am left wondering, was there a purpose to changing our name officially when it remains difficult to distinguish ourselves from Castle Pines Village without use of the use of North at the end of our name?  I received a flyer for a holiday party and the invitation read “Castle Pines North”.  Are we actually embracing the name of Castle Pines or are we left a mere shell of our former selves leaving everyone to wonder if what we really meant to say was “the Village."

Kathy Dunker

Castle Pines resident



October 6, 2010

Dear Editor,

I find your paper to be of great substance on local issues and when I see the paper show up in the mail I always look forward to reading it.

The Quiet Zone article was of great interest to me and my family as our property lies just South of Castle Pines and our crossing is one of those that generates the whistle from the trains that pass through the corridor. What is amazing to me is the fact that the same train and whistle pass through Castle Rock and continue through Sedalia and have for a hundred years and all was well.

Your article [Volume 2, Number 10 - October issue] states that the new residents of the Village are upset with the noise and it has to stop....what? Can anyone else hear the train whistle from Castle Rock to Sedalia? Didn't anyone tell them about the train whistle before they bought their new home, or did they not realize the train was there where all can see.

We have never been invited to a meeting of any committee that was spearheading the Quiet Zone and it is our crossing (among others) that require the whistle to blow, did they not want to know or care about the safety issues? Possibly not. The warning from the train whistle has saved lives on this place as well as other crossings and if anyone wants to take that safety away from a property owner should think about the ramifications of what could happen.

Sure we find the whistle annoying at times but the trade off is safety and the fact we have not had a near miss or, thank GOD, any fatal accidents due to the fact that the whistle sounded in time.

We have had contact with the Federal Railroad Administration and I can say one thing for sure, don't throw away your earplugs just yet.

Best Regards,
Norman Joslyn Sr.



September 2, 2010

Hi Castle Pines Connection,

I guess this question is for Lisa Crocket, but perhaps Terri can answer it…

Having just read the article referenced above in The Connection, I didn’t find any discussion in support of these Amendments. My sense about it is it was totally one-sided. If that was the intent, then mission accomplished.

I would be interested in hearing (or reading) arguments in favor of the Amendments. Any chance of that in The Connection? Surely there in another side to the story, eh?


Paul Fortson
An interested resident of CPN

Mr. Forston,

Thank you for your input regarding the story in the September issue of The Castle Pines Connection regarding Amendments 60 & 61 and Proposition 101.

Your summation that the article was one sided is accurate to the extent that the intent of the story was to report that many organization and entities that do not generally weigh in on ballot issues have done so in a very bold and public manner.  To the contrary, The Castle Pines Connection has not taken a public stand on this proposed legislation and does not wish to influence public opinion either way. 

The writer did not address the pros or cons of the proposed legislation, but rather reported on the overt actions these local entities and organizations are taking. (There are numerous resources available that present  the specific details on either side of the discussion.)

The October issue of the paper may go into more specifics about the pros and cons of the proposed legislation, although getting any response from those in favor of the ballot measures has proven to be a challenge. The Douglas County contact on the matter has still not responded to my writer's request for a comment from several weeks ago, and state-wide, the organization supporting the initiatives - CO Tax Reforms - are only answering questions via e-mail, and not very readily at that (see recent story in the Denver Post).

I welcome all input on the issue, and I am happy to share your comments and any others I receive with our readers. Our goal is to provide information and resources, and to encourage our readership to educate themselves independently on the issues.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts,,

Terri Wiebod, editor



September 1, 2010

Dear Editor - The headline from the front-page article in the most recent issue of "The Castle Pines Connection" states, "Local groups openly oppose fall ballot measures". This headline implies that "local groups" are a cross-section of the community that are in open opposition to certain ballot measures. However, unless I misunderstood the article, the "local groups" are all organizations, which would lose funding if the measures in question were approved.

It is understandable that these "groups" would oppose propositions and amendments which would reduce their budgets. Unless readers digest the entire article, they are likely to perceive that "local groups" refers to the community at large. If "The Castle Pines Connection" were truly trying to be "The Voice of the Castle Pines Community", a headline that more accurately represents the nature of the article would be appropriate. People often read headlines and nothing else.

I was also struck by "A Snapshot of What They are Saying", especially the statement by the Douglas County Board of County Commissioners. They state that these questions..."will negatively impact jobs and our local economy." Are they quite confident that the expenditure of funds by The County Board will better influence jobs and the economy than the same amount spent by local citizens?

Almost without exception, the quotes indicate that if the measures were approved, the organizations would be forced to reduce services to the public. Is that truly the only alternative? Aren't there other ways these "groups" can cut costs and still provide quality services? Using their status quo budgeting models, there may be no other choice, but maybe there are other models to be considered. Businesses go through events like this often. Many times the result is lower costs and improved services. Instead of threatening to punish the public if they approve the ballots, what keeps our "local groups" from stating they will make their best efforts to accomplish the same?

Gary Lane
Castle Rock


Mr. Lane,

Thank you for taking the time to write regarding the story in the September issue of The Castle Pines Connection regarding Amendments 60 & 61 and Proposition 101. You bring up good questions that perhaps other readers might have as well, and I appreciate the opportunity to help clarify any misconceptions.

Your observation that these local groups are implied to be a cross-section of the community is not one I had considered. Rather, the intent was to report on the fact that many local groups who do not generally take a stand one way or another on political issues such as these have done so publicly in regard to 60, 61 & 101. The article intentionally does not address the pros or cons of the proposed legislation, but focuses on the overt actions these local entities and organizations are taking.

You are correct in noting that many of the organizations that have taken a stand in opposition to the measures may experience cutbacks in their budgets There are others that, as far as I know, do not receive any funding (ie: The Castle Pines Chamber of Commerce, the League of Women Voters, among others).

Whether there are alternatives for many of these organization to cut costs and still provide quality services is yet to be seen. That the leaders of these organizations (many of whom are elected or appointed officials) are stating otherwise is newsworthy, whether you or I agree on what they are saying.

The October issue of the paper may go into more specifics about the pros and cons of the proposed legislation, although getting any response from those in favor of the ballot measures has proven to be a challenge. The Douglas County contact on the matter has still not responded to my writer's request for a comment, and state-wide they are only answering questions via e-mail, and not very readily at that ( . I welcome all input on the issue, and I am happy to share your comments and any others I receive with our readers.

The Castle Pines Connection has not taken a public stand on this proposed legislation and, as editor, I do not wish to influence public opinion either way. My goal is to provide information and resources, and to encourage our readership to not only read the headlines and the complete stories we present in the paper, but to educate themselves independently on the issues.

Thank you for your contributions,

Terri Wiebold

Editor, The Castle Pines Connection



August 12, 2010


I've been neglectful with work/travel to circle back around and extend a warm-hearted Thank You! I appreciate you learning about, coordinating and putting Lisa Crockett on the Lone Tree Arts Centerassignment. The front page placement was never expected yet nothing less than fantastic! It has been a valuable piece of supporting collateral via sending links to your online publication and the entire campaign cabinet has been receiving plenty of positive community feedback.

All the best,

Michael Robben
Member ~ Lone Tree Arts Foundation Campaign Cabinet


August 3, 2010

Passing the URA late in the Spring and then describing its ramifications in mid summer, when many people are on vacation, seems backwards and a somewhat neighborhood confusing ploy by the Council/Developer. It is somewhat reminiscent of important zoning issues resolved late at night at The Denver City Council meetings. If nothing else this is a cleaver strategy.


David Metsch
Charter Oaks Neighborhood



July 1, 2010


Thank you for the article you included about me [Jami Arthur, president "Track the Tag"] in the current issue of The Castle Pines Connection. Patte did such a wonderful job writing it.

My husband and I enjoy reading your paper. You do a great job covering the local scene and concerns.  It was an honor to be included!

Best regards,

Jami Arthur

Surrey Ridge resident



July 1, 2010

A very cleaver strategy by savvy developers and attorneys of high profile. This URA was put in place by the City within a week before the State Legislature made this process no longer possible anywhere in Colorado.

Intergovernmental Agreements running with the land have been ignored.  Blight has had its definition ingeniously reshaped.

As an aside, when will the natural beauty of a place (like the Gulf Coast) be left as is, where is ?

As a long time resident of Douglas County, a county struggling with water, schools and a recession not seen since the Great Depression I think the Castle Pines URA is misguided and potentially illegal. Developers and lobbyists may tell you otherwise.


David Metsch
Charter Oaks Resident



June 30, 2010

Just a note of thanks. I really learned a lot about what's going on in the community by reading your recent e-mail. It would be very helpful to me, and I believe others, if you would also included information on the status of the city's legal action to dissolve the Metro District and integrate it directly into the city. Thanks again!

Al Quartararo,

CPN Resident - Noble Ridge



June 20, 2010

From: The Coalition to Keep Happy Canyon Open

The Coalition to Keep Happy Canyon Road is firmly opposed to Castle Pines Village effort to spend over $1,000,000 to construct traffic circles along Happy Canyon Road.  The coalition is composed of over 15 HOA’s, associations, and business groups representing over 4,000 citizens.  The group has researched published traffic circle criteria and the two proposed traffic circle intersections do not meet any accident, speed, or traffic conditions to warrant the traffic circles, stop lights, etc.

The circles are proposed at the two gate entrance locations to Castle Pines Village. The accident data over five and a half years shows an average of less than 2 accidents/year at the proposed traffic circle locations.  Further, any accident in one of the circles could grid-lock Happy Canyon Road.   

The citizens of western Douglas County should not have a primary emergency service route to the Sky Ridge Medical complex impeded by two traffic circles. Indeed, we have found many communities have traffic circle construction guidelines prohibiting any blockage of this type along a key emergency service route.  In fact, every service call out of Fire Station 39 on Happy Canyon would encounter these traffic circles.  No one has measured the increase in emergency service response time when a fire truck encounters the circles vs. their normal transit time.  What happens to response time during bad weather, traffic in the circle, an accident, etc?  Every second counts in an emergency.

While Castle Pines may be funding the construction, DC residents do not want to pay for the up-keep, modifications, or potential removal of the medians or circles.

The Coalition remains suspicious about Castle Pines Village exerting their control over a public county road and their long-term plans.  While the current boards of the Village may not desire privatization, who knows how future boards may act. Why haven’t they offered to modify their HOA declarations to make it difficult for future boards to privatize the road? Most see this proposal for what it seems to be: an attempt to simply restrict traffic through Happy Canyon and as a back-up plan for last year’s failed privatization attempt.

The traffic circles would have a negative impact on the rural character of Happy Canyon Road and has the potential to create an elite and privileged enclave entrance effect with the tax payers footing the bill for up-keep.

Last year an extensive Happy Canyon road usage survey was conducted by the county following the April 2, 2009 Open House attended by 500+ residents.  Over 300 responded to the survey and only 8% felt there was a need for traffic calming devices with only one non-CPV resident supporting traffic calming devices. This survey, plus the over-whelming negative response to an April 22, 2010 out -reach meeting held in Sedalia, shows zero non-CPV support for the project and their belief that traffic control circles are simply not warranted on Happy Canyon Road.

If the current design of Happy Canyon Road was a major source of accidents, the public would demand something be done. There is no public demand or desire for traffic control devices except from a few within Castle Pines.

While a free privately funded project seems attractive, we have asked the Douglas County commissioners to weigh the data and respect the will of the majority of Douglas County citizens so loudly expressed last year and again this year:  Don’t change Happy Canyon Road; it belongs to everyone!

Every citizen is welcome to hear the Castle Pines Metro District’s presentation to the County Board of Commissioners on Tuesday, June 29.  There will be presentation only at 1:30 PM and at 7:30 PM there will be another presentation where there will be   time for public comment on the project. The meeting will be held in the Hearing Room, 100 Third Street, Castle Rock.

Citizen comment should be sent to the Board of County Commissioners at or call them at 303-660-7401.

The Coalition to Keep Happy Canyon Road Open

Contacts: Les Lilly: 303 845-2862 or Steve Tomasek, 303-660-39442


June 9, 2010

It is with disappointment and concern that I watch our once proud and honorable community devolve.

I get that CPN was a planned community and it has grown, more-or-less as planned. But it seems like with expansion has come a mind-set of expansion, commercial and otherwise, that is proving embarrassing and even counter-productive. I feel like this mind-set was given a false sense of entitlement through the process of incorporation and at a certain point I think it's fair to ask, now, what really was the point?

To be honest I kind of ignored incorporation, figuring those (probably) newcomers simply needed to express their political side - okay, have it and good luck.

But now I feel like a victim to their ambitions. Sorry. IF those folks needed to create another layer of government in order to express and scratch some kind of political itch - not here, folks. Don't need it, don't want it. I'm a neighbor - not a "citizen".  A nuance, which some don't seem to want to hear.

For instance - Sales taxes, which were quite sensible when we were charged according to the unincorporated Douglas County rate of four percent (4.0%), are almost double that.  And for what? Not much added benefit, far as I can see. Some more commercial development, maybe, perhaps a modicum more convenience. But nothing else. Again, for about DOUBLE the sales taxes? Ouch !!

What I do see is simply more contentious and expensive and shameful conflict with our neighbors, the quite-effective Metro District, and so on. And lawsuits even!  What??

And this whole urban blight deal...what is up with that?  Can't help but feel that somewhere "the fix is in".  I keep hearing from "our" Council that there shouldn't be all of this angst surrounding that issue, as it was "on the books and open for discussion" for over a year. Gotta say - I knew nothing, heard nothing about it until I read about it in the Post. Really? Hey, Council, a deal is a deal - that whole development to the East went through a rigorous vetting process with the County and our various neighbors.  And I seem to remember that CPN's HOA's where involved and got behind the eventually agreed upon compromises. Why, really truly, is CPN - actually the Council - doing all that Urban Blight thing? In one sense I don't "get it".  In a whole 'nother sense, I smell a rat.  I feel betrayed from the spirit of what CPN was all about.

I say, let's take a mulligan on incorporation. Incorporation was, and is, a useless, costly, embarrasing experiment.  Un-incorporate.

David Terrien

CPN Resident


May 20, 2010

Dear Editor,

I am writing to express my pure disappointment in the tactics taken by the Council of Castle Pines North. Their current plans to declare over 3,000-acres of native prairie land as "Urban Blight" is a clear abuse of what the Urban Renewal Authority laws were intended for. The State Legislature has recognized this and changed the law so that it cannot be applied to agricultural land; however, this change does not go into effect until June 1st. Hence the rush to schedule the necessary meetings to occur before this date.

But let's be clear. This is all about money. When the town of CPN annexed the Canyons last year, there was a clause in the agreement that, if the town could get the Canyons out of a legally binding agreement they entered into years ago with local HOAs in the area, the Canyons would pay the town $1,000,000. The real intent of declaring this prairie land as Urban Blight, and bringing the land under the jurisdiction of the Town Council's self appointed Urban Renewal Authority (URA) is that it may give them the power to declare all previous agreements null and void! This is a backhanded way to nullify a long standing agreement. If this happens, the developer will be free to disregard all previous agreements and greatly increase the housing congestion on these properties as well as add commercial areas.

This URA also gives the town the ability to sap tax revenue from critical services like the South Metro Fire Rescue Authority and divert it to the pockets of the private developer.

This move has been object to by many, many residents; neighboring HOAs, the Board of Directors of the South Metro Fire Rescue Authority, and the Board of County Commissioners of Douglas County. Yet, the Town Council seems determined to not listen to others, and plow blindly forward to pass this declaration.

I hope that on May 25th the Council Members come to the meeting with an open mind and vote for what is RIGHT, not just for what makes them money.

Ray Schieferecke
Castle Rock, CO



May 5, 2010

CPN Residents,

I moved here 4 years ago because I loved the rural community and small town feel. I feel we are in danger of losing everything that is important with our community. In my mind, we are compounding mistakes with more mistakes in our small town.

1) We incorporated - This was by far the biggest mistake and throughout everything, our politicians have defended their mistakes to save face. I realize that 70% or so of our residents voted for it, but it was because of the campaign put on by our current politicians who were more organized and had a much larger budget. Why did we need to become a city anyway? It seems to me all we have received is higher taxes on purchases, more potholes, and political infighting. Our extra taxes have gone to paying people at CH2MHill and other consultants and legal fees. Additionally, one of the big selling points for incorporation was to keep the very small sales tax revenue away from the Castle Pines Village, who have made the right decision and not incorporated.

2) Calling the Canyons blighted - This got us a negative article in the Denver Post which was embarrassing. This rule was never intended for this, and although it may be permissible until June 1st, it is unethical. This path should be discontinued immediately. Our community was never meant to be large, I love that we are only 10,000 residents with a few small retail establishments, why do we need to be more, because the city is lacking funds?

3) Integrating the Metro District - According to many experts, including our current Treasurer, this integration of the Metro District into the city is a bad move. It seems to me again that the city is trying to take control over something it knows nothing about. I see that they have appointed James McGrady as a consultant. I hope he does the right thing and gives his true feelings and does not become swayed by the very people who are paying him. This is becoming an expensive endeavor by the city. There are legal fees and consultant fees that go along with this.

Our property values have suffered enough from circumstances beyond our control, let's not add to it by ruining a great little town. Many people in our community who I have spoken too feel the same way. I encourage the politicians to get out there and find out what people love about our community and represent the people, not self-interests. If we really wanted to do the right thing, we would dissolve the city and go back to being unincorporated Douglas County, which is what we should have done all along.

John Merriman
CPN Resident

April 29, 2010

The Board of Directors of the South Metro Fire Rescue Authority is very concerned by the recent attempt by the new City of Castle Pines North to jump across I-25, and declare over 3,000 acres of a new development as “blighted” under the Urban Renewal Act, thereby depriving local fire districts, and other service districts of the revenue needed to provide Douglas County with essential services.  This could deprive Douglas County families of emergency services because the revenue needed to fund these services will have been taken to fund development of this “blighted” area.

The only reason to create an Urban Renewal Area is to put in place a “tax increment financing” mechanism to benefit development in the “blighted” area.  Essentially, the taxable value of property that special districts collect revenue from is frozen at current levels.  As development occurs and those values increase, the dollars that would have been collected by the districts are siphoned off to pay for improvements benefitting that development.  So, while new residents move in and new businesses are constructed, the money that the fire departments would use to protect not only them but the new businesses, does not materialize, often for as long as 20 years.

A new state law, House Bill 1107, was enacted to prevent just such a land grab.  Only Castle Pines North wants to pull off this maneuver before the law takes effect June 1st

Let’s be clear here … the City has never contacted those of us at the Authority to ask about how this would impact us.  We learned about the “blighted” strategy through the media - and it is obvious that the hurry is to avoid the enactment of HB1107, which specifically halts this type of abuse.  Only, at the Council meeting did staff announce that they were scheduling a meeting with the affected agencies. 

Here are the specific issues we have with this flawed and unfair mechanism.  First, diverting tax money that was voter approved for emergency services and education to development is unfair and uncalled-for.  Secondly, because fire districts cover multiple cities and portions of unincorporated counties, this mechanism shifts the costs of one jurisdiction’s taxpayers to another.  If the loss of taxation in one area produces the need for a mill levy increase across the entire district, the burden is shifted to others.  Lastly, the development from vacant land to hundreds or thousands of homes or multi-story buildings changes the demand on emergency services.  With this system of development there is no provision for pay-as-you-go growth.

While it may be a boon for the City, who wants to jump start much needed development in its jurisdiction, it puts the burden on the backs of the very districts that provide the most essential services to their citizens.  If the city must take this action, it should only do so in a way that special district services are not compromised.

We’re opposed to this eleventh hour move by Castle Pines North to build its tax revenues without consideration for the impact on other residents we serve, and we’ll be speaking out against the fairness of this action, especially because there’s a new state law that would prohibit this very practice.

Ken Molscan, SMFR Authority Board President

South Metro Fire Rescue Authority



April 29, 2010

Dear City Council did you ever stop to consider

  • That the homeowners of CPN cherish our rural nature and small town spirit?
  • That the charm of CPN is its pastoral ambiance remote from the nearby urban developments that compact DTC?
  • That, for the current and future residents of CPN, that quality is what draws value and worth to our homes?

Did you ever stop to consider that when we voted to incorporate that that unique element of CPN is the asset we were voting to protect?

As you make every decision without quarry as if it were yours alone, as you connive at every turn to keep your jurisdiction, and as you sell your loyalties to the highest bidder all to cover up an ill conceived fiscal plan needlessly used to market incorporation did you ever stop to consider that you are destroying the very thing that we are trying to protect?

Stacie Sneider

Devoted CPN Homeowner

cc: The Castle Pines Connection



April 27

Great article on the URA. All of facts and their consequences were well presented and informative. Thanks.

Barb Saenger

April 26

Honorable Mayor and City Council.

I wish I could attend the Council meeting on April 27th and speak personally.  Please enter my remarks into the record.

I understand that there has recently been controversy regarding the establishment of an Urban Renewal Authority (URA).

I wish to speak in SUPPORT of a URA.

URA’s have been specifically authorized by Colorado law. In its last session, the CPN City Council has spent many hours over many months investigating how a URA might be utilized to effectively enhance the development potential and tax revenue for our City. This investigation is continuing.  I believe that the City should form a URA and investigate fully its use.

In the final analysis, there is no reason that this tool, used by many municipalities in the past, should not be something our City has available to it.  It has the potential to provide revenue enhancement and spur economic development – which can have significant positive benefits for the City – and doing this while diminishing the potential for additional ad valorem tax on the residents.

Like any quasi-governmental entity – its existence is not a problem – it is how the entity is managed. We should not eliminate this window of opportunity available to us despite outside controlled special interests lobbying of our citizens.  I have faith in our elected leaders to properly manage this and hope Council will provide for our citizens best interest by passing this ordinance.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Chip Coppola
Resident – Ward 2


April 23, 2010

The Happy Canyon Homeowners' Association and The Pinery Homeowners's Association entered into a legally binding agreement with The Canyons' owners in 2001 to protect water rights, view-sheds, open space and limit commercial and residential development. The agreement aligned with The Canyons'  Planned Development that Douglas County approved in 2000. It also complemented the High Plateau Study, an IGA between Castle Rock and the County, and DRGOC's goals and vision to keep Castle Rock a free-standing community while protecting the view-shed areas along I-25.
At the annexation hearing in October 2009, County Commissioner Boand spoke in support of the agreement and hand-delivered a copy for the record. Castle Rock and Castle Pines also spoke in support of the agreement. Why? Because the annexation and approval of this development violated the intent and commitments made by the owners', and would affect not only Happy Canyon residents, but  thousands of others.
The reason our HOA has not negotiated on amending the agreement is that our residents don't want to compromise their quality of life. If The Canyons' owners are unwilling to honor this agreement, why would they honor a new one? What is at stake here is a loss of everyone's quality of life that we moved here for, I think that they are trying to create the very thing that we all moved away from - urban sprawl.
So, is the intent of URA to terminate the agreement? If so, they are throwing our HOA under the bus along with everyone else who supports it. The fast-tracking of the URA and subsequent approval before House Bill 1107's June 1st effective date may provide the City the tool to terminate the agreement by condemning The "blighted" Canyons property.
We are a part of the Castle Pines Community by patronizing your businesses, and attending the same churches and schools. We simply request that the City and The Canyons' owners be "good stewards" of the agreement and honor it.
Leslie H. Lilly
Happy Canyon Homeowners' Association



April 23, 2010

Dear Editor,
Many Castle Pines North residents may not be aware of a very important issue facing our community, whether to integrate or not integrate the services provided by our city and the CPN Metro District.  This isn’t an easy issue to understand and until I was asked to serve on the Castle Pines North Integration Committee, I had only peripheral knowledge of the issue.

To begin to understand this issue, imagine living in a world where you were forced to buy two of everything, even though you only need or want one.  This isn’t a “buy one get one free” world either; we are talking full retail pricing.   When buying a lawnmower you were forced to by two, you have to have two high-speed data connections, two household insurance policies, two pets, two engagement rings, starting to get the picture?  It is a terrible waste of money, taxpayer money, it is your money.   Well guess what?  You do live in this world unless we integration the services of the city and the CPN Metro District, we will buy two a lot of things for a very long time.
If we do not hold our elected officials (both City Council and our Metro Board) accountable to stop wasting our money, we will continue to pay twice for many, many things.  Building rent, phone lines, insurance, web-sites, high-speed data access, IT support, fax machines, consultants, attorneys, public relations experts, a district manager AND a city manager, the list goes on and on.
As we are approaching the election of two CPN Metro District Board Members, I encourage my fellow CPN City Residents to educate themselves on the issues by attending City Council Meetings, Metro Board Meetings and asking questions of our elected officials in order to help make the right choices moving forward and to ensure that your voice is heard.
Jon Radloff
CPN Integration Committee Member and Castle Pines North Resident




Dear Editor,


It is not about NCAA Basketball Championship. In my opinion there is anger among Castle Pines North Homeowners relating to the operation and byzantine structure governing and providing vital services to Castle Pines North, including CPN Master Association, CPN Metropolitan District (Metro District), CPN Parks Authority, and CPN City of Castle Pines North ( CP Chamber of Commerce and CP Library maintain separate websites). The list of issues generating anger among CPN Homeowners is too lengthy to cover here and I apologize for omitting some CPN Homeowner concerns brought to my attention. The Connection provides the opportunity to all CPN business owners, developers and CPN Homeowners to voice their concerns.

The primary concern relates to the critical issue of renewable water. In September, 2005, the Metro District hired a leading engineering firm, Camp, Dresser & McKee to develop an Integrated Water Resource Plan (IWRP) for Castle Pines North. This IWRP was completed during late September,2006 and,among other things, provided extensive research and guidance on how best to acquire renewable water supplies. Since 1984, the Metro District has relied on Denver Basin groundwater, a finite, unsustainable, and increasingly more expensive resource. Groundwater levels and well production rates continue to decline in Douglas County. The Camp,Dresser & McKee report projected cost of renewable water for Castle Pines North approximately $60 million. The recent Metro District announcement of the Interconnect Pipeline Project completion is among the most significant accomplishments for the benefit of Castle Pines North in the history of the Metro District. Replenishing the Castle Pines North Water Supply, Storage, Transportation, Treatment and Delivery of adequate fresh safe water remains a primary issue that the joint committee of the City and Metro District should be included in integration options.

Lower Taxes and fees is another top priority of CPN Businesses and CPN Homeowners. In 1993, a predictable schedule of limited mill levies and an extended bond repayment period became effective. The Metro District at that time was obligated to pay back $60 million of outstanding debt. At the beginning of 2006, approximately $31 million of outstanding debt remained. That existing debt was restructured and restrictive bond covenants were removed. From 2006 to the present the Metro District prepaid a substantial portion of debt without incurring any penalties for such prepayment. While still mired in debt, the Metro District has been paying approximately $1 million each year according to audited financial statements. The joint committee of the City and Metro District should be mindful of the legal issues involved that restrict integration options. The joint committee should be aware of CPN Homeowners anger regarding the 2.75% sales tax imposed on big purchases and fees paid by CPN Businesses.

Mayor Huff has his work cut out and should be supported to by the City Council to maintain the reputation that Castle Pines North is the place to shop, enjoy and live in Douglas County.



CPN Resident

February 19, 2010


The City of Castle Pines North advertisement appearing in February 2010, page 6, The Castle Pines Connection, omitted to reveal City of Castle Pines North Staff including the positions of City Manager, Deputy City Treasurer, and Deputy City Clerk are paid employees of CH2MHILL. In fact beginning January 1, 2010, CH2MHILL will be paid a Monthly Amount, January through April 30, 2010, $93,998. Total Monthly Amount for May 1, 2010 through December 31,2010 will be $81,498. Total CH2MHILL 2010 payments may total over $1 million.

CH2MHILL, providing City of Castle Pines North Services, owes Castle Pines North Homeowners an explanation how the relatively serious deficiencies in contravention of State of Colorado Statutes noted in footnotes 6 and 7 to the City of Castle Pines North Audited Statement for Fiscal Year 2008 happened. These footnotes stated the following:

Footnote #6. In pertinent part, "The City is required to establish an emergency reserve, representing 3% of qualifying expenditures, as required by the (Tabor) Amendment. At December 31, 2008, the City did not have adequate fund balance to establish the reserve, estimated at $25,000."

Footnote #7. In pertinent part, "In its initial period of operations, the City suffered a significant loss from operations and has a fund balance deficiency that raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue to meet obligations as they become due without external assistance, significant revisions to its operations, or other similar actions."

In a letter, December, 2009, Bill Santos, President, Castle Pines Metropolitan District ( hereinafter "Metro District") stated, among other things, " The Metro District remains committed to finding ways to save our community money; we believe continued development of an integration plan jointly by the City and District is the most effective way to continue to move towards our common constituents' objectives."

Mayor Huff, in office only two weeks, should be given the opportunity to continue talking with the Metro District. The City resolution to integrate/dissolve the Metro District commences a process that can be extremely expensive, especially if the City were to lose as there is no assurance the City will prevail. In light of the City's Audited Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2008, it is highly unlikely the City will prevail.

The Metro District has been a highly successful operation serving Castle Pines North Homeowners for over twenty years and holds a widely recognized distinguished reputation for providing Municipal services. There is no rational reason to replace the Metro District with an enterprise that lacks competency, responsibility, familiarity with serious water issues of Castle Pines North

CH2MHILL should immediately turnover the responsibility for all accounting services, to the Metro District who has the professional staff to maintain City financial accounting books and records, collect revenues and disbursements, in compliance with Colorado requirements, on a cost basis that could be at an enormous money saving to the City.                 

Dan Schatz



February 7, 2010

Honorable Mayor Huff [and copy to editor of The Castle Pines Connection]:

I am a seventh grader at Rocky Heights Middle School and a residence of Surrey Ridge. I am apart of Defenders of Wildlife, and have spent many hours trying to solve the problems that people and carnivores face. I truly hope that your decision is not to exterminate the coyotes in Castle Pines, and I am sure my peers feel the same way. The coyotes in this area have lived here long before people settled here. I read about the Jack Russell terrier being eaten in the Castle Pines Connection. Realistically, this is the owners fault. All creatures need to eat. All carnivores need to eat meat, and most of them hunt at dawn and at dusk. Small pets shouldn’t be outside at these hours. Every specie on the face of this earth has a purpose. If you eliminate one specie in a specific habitat, the ecosystem will decline in health. I’m afraid that if you eliminate the coyotes, residents will complain about the vole and rabbit populations, and then they will have to be exterminated too. If people learn to cope with the coyotes, then there will be peace, and the ecosystem won’t have to suffer. I personally enjoy the presence of the coyotes, and would like to see them for years to come. The coyotes are apart of Colorado’s heritage, and it would be shameful to rid of our heritage! Please reconsider your thoughts. Thank you for your time.


Parker Groves, Surrey Ridge resident

[Response shared with The Castle Pines Connection from Mayor Huff]:

Dear Parker:

Thank you for your thoughtful letter. I am glad to see that you have a passion for protecting our Colorado heritage and our wildlife in particular. My home in Castle Pines North is only a few hundred feet from your Surrey Ridge neighborhood. During the past ten years, I have enjoyed seeing fox, deer, elk, coyotes, owls, hawks and many smaller mammals in my own yard. You are absolutely correct about the benefit of coyotes in controlling the mice and voles. A few years ago, when the fox and coyotes were not so numerous, people complained to me about the rabbits and voles eating their grass and flowers. At the time, our homeowner association took steps to attract birds of prey to help control the rodents. This solution worked better than poisoning the voles, which could have hurt other animals in the food chain.

As Mayor, I have to make difficult decisions that take into account the wishes of many different people and groups. That is why our City Council is carefully debating how to approach this issue. We are doing a lot of research ourselves. While we haven't made a final decision, our preference is to help educate people about how to coexist with wildlife. We do not have a policy to exterminate the coyotes. However, if a coyote attacked a human, we would probably have to take strong measures to make sure that people are not at risk of harm.

Perhaps one of the ways your group could help would be to distribute informational brochures in your neighborhood. I've attached a copy of a brochure printed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife that we have used here in Castle Pines North. If your group, Defenders of Wildlife, would like some copies to pass out, I will see that they get delivered to you. Please share this e-mail with your peers at school so everyone understands what we are trying to do.


Jeffrey Huff
Mayor, Castle Pines North


February 7, 2010

Dear Editor,

[In reference to the article "Castle Pines Metropolitan District proposes roundabouts on Happy Canyon Road" printed in the February 2010 issue of The Castle Pines Connection]

Roundabouts are the stupidest way to reduce speeding. Yes, it will do so, preventing some accidents and probably causing a few others (not everybody knows how to navigate a roundabout), but the cost to build something unnecessary is a travesty in these difficult economic times. How about they [DCSO] patrol the road, at random times every day; with a policy of issuing one warning. After a few weeks, the regular commuters - which is most of the traffic - will stop speeding. By patrolling at random, unpublished, times, costs will be low (even 30 minutes a day would be enough). Use a little of the money saved by not building the roundabouts to pay any overtime needed, and all the money left over to do something productive.

You would be surprised at how often I write comments and never get any reply at all. My frustration shows, doesn't it? Thank you for reading my comments and passing them on.

Valerie Shainin , Castle Pines North resident


Thank you for taking the time to share you comments with our editorial staff regarding the proposed roundabouts on Happy Canyon Road. Your opinion is important and relevant, and certainly worth sharing. I have forwarded your comments on to the Castle Pines Metro District, as it has expressed interest in hearing any public comments regarding the roundabouts, and I am confident they will take your comments into consideration.

Your e-mail was also forwarded to the Douglas County Sheriff's Office (DCSO) Patrol/Traffic Section Commander, Lieutenant Troy McCarty, who provided this response:

"I think it's important for everybody to know that we have spent many hours conducting enforcement on Happy Canyon Road over the last few years. The majority of the enforcement has been based on request by residence living in the area. Looking at statistical information since 2004, we've handled 44 crashes (causation factors not known), have written over 2000 citations and have made 38 DUI arrests. Whether the round-a-bout project is approved or not, we will continue to conduct periodic enforcement along Happy Canyon, as long as residence feel there is a traffic problem."

Again, thank you for taking the time to respond and for your continued interest and participation in The Castle Pines Connection.

Best Wishes,

Terri Wiebold,
Editor, The Castle Pines Connection

February 4, 2010

Dear Editor,

In the The Castle Pines Connection, I am seeing "Castle Pines, CO 80108"... everywhere; did I miss something? When was "North" dropped and can we start using Castle Pines, CO 80108 as our new return address? I would love to use it, but I would sure like to know, if it is the legally correct return address. Especially since my children live in Castle Rock (Sapphire Point) and have the 80108 zip code.

I have never like using "North" in my address or conversations about where I live, so please let me know. By the way; if there is a Castle Pines North, then where is Castle Pines and Castle Pines South/East/West? I know where The Village is...


LuEllen McCormack

Hi LuEllen,

The postal service has advised residents of the Castle Pines Community that it is perfectly acceptable to use either "Castle Rock," "Castle Pines," or "Castle Pines North" as a mailing address as long as the correct zip code is also used. Remember, however, that if you wish to use something other than "Castle Rock" on mailings that have to do with "official" business (like credit cards or other matters where you are a registered account holder) your address needs to match what is on file with the company where you hold the account.

As for the "North" in Castle Pines North (CPN), it was added to distinguish CPN from Castle Pines Village. It has not been dropped from the name of the city, but here at The Castle Pines Connection, we serve readers in the larger community, so we do not use it.

Kind regards,
Lisa Crockett
Staff Writer, The Castle Pines Connection



February 1, 2010

Is there anyway to explain to the residents of Castle Pines North that we would all be better off if they would quit embellishing the stories about coyotes in the neighborhood? I, for one, am sick and tired of hearing Castle Pines residents saying, “A coyote chased me!”
Coyotes run at an average speed of 43 miles per hour. World class marathon runners can run at 12 to 14 miles per hour. Trust me, a coyote would not chase a Castle Pines resident – it would be on top of them before they could blink.
If coyotes are going to be the focal point of continuing conversation among a group of residents who are afraid of their own shadow and don’t know how to protect themselves, then at least tell the truth. As in, “I saw a coyote from a distance and I’m afraid to carry a gun in case of attack.”
In everyone’s defense, the coyote embellishment doesn’t even being to touch the commentary about “medical marijuana” with which your readers had absolutely no first hand experience with either a growing operation or a dispensary but “knew all about” them.
Help me, Rhonda!
Michael R. Ford
A Resident of Castle Pines North


February 1, 2010

You have the BEST little newspaper.  It’s amazing how much information comes packed between its pages.  We read it cover to cover.  Good job!

Daryl Heskin



February 1, 2010

I just wanted to drop a note and say “Thank You” to you, and your advertisers, who make the Connection possible. If you charged for this, I would buy a subscription (not to give you any ideas). I look forward to even more news articles about our communities.
Best regards.

Chip Coppola

January 29, 2010

I read your paper each time I bring my daughters to the orthodontist in CPN.  While I am very impressed, it leaves me disappointed every time that Castle Rock does not have it's own newspaper.  Yours is truly the neighborhood type of paper that I have always enjoyed reading. The Castle Rock News Press could just as well be the Highlands Ranch/Lone Tree/Sedalia/etc... News Press.  I don't dislike it - I just want more.
Is your paper published by the city of CPN or an HOA?  Just curious as I would love to see a real newspaper evolve in this part of town.
Thanks for your time.

Laura Alfano



Thank you so much for your kind words regarding The Castle Pines Connection community newspaper.  We are a locally owned and operated business, published independently from the City of Castle Pines North and not funded by any homeowner's associations.  Our financial support comes strictly from local business owners and advertisers, many of whom live in the Castle Pines community themselves.   The local businesses are an integral part of the Castle Pines community and the community's story, and their support for the paper (financial and otherwise) has been overwhelming.

I am fortunate to work with a staff of individuals who are not only very talented, but who are passionate about the community - most of them live locally.  That, combined with the willingness of outside agencies (the city of CPN, South Metro Fire Rescue, Douglas County Sheriff's Office, etc.) to contribute content specific to the Castle Pines community, helps add to the local feel.  It reads like a neighborhood newspaper because the Castle Pines community continues to provide feedback about what they want to see in their paper, and they allow us to share their stories each month.

The Castle Pines Connection also maintains a community website that may be of interest to you:  We also send out e-mail alerts about upcoming community events, important safety information, road issues and closures (including I-25), and updates to on-going news stories.  I'd be happy to add you to our distribution list to receive the periodic updates.  Just sign up here:

Thank you for your feedback and for your continued interest in The Castle Pines Connection.

Terri Wiebold
Editor, The Castle Pines Connection


January 12, 2010

Dear Ms. Wiebold:
Just a note to thank you for including our community, Happy Canyon, in the distribution of your monthly newspaper. I am sure residents will come to find your publication a trusted source of local news, information, and activities. On behalf of our residents, I wish you every success.

Leslie H. Lilly, President
Happy Canyon Homeowners' Association



© 2008-2014 The Castle Pines Connection | Sitemap | Webmaster