President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

February 11, 2011 01:13 AM UTC

Blind Spot: Hancock and Metro Taxi

1 Comments
by: Colorado Pols

As the slate of Denver mayoral candidates report their numbers for last month, opponents of city councilman Michael Hancock are turning up the heat over his role in the ongoing denial of PUC approval for Mile High Cab to launch taxi service in metro Denver. Last September, you might recall, columnist Susan Greene argued the plight of Mile High Cab, and competition-stavred consumers in Denver–and the stiff opposition to their bid from Michael Hancock.

In January, Hancock reported over $125,000 in contributions, with at least $8,000 of that total from Metro Taxi or employees. And Metro Taxi has consistently been a top contributor to Hancock–something, as this Xtranormal-ified transcript we were forwarded from Hancock’s PUC testimony against Mile High Cab last fall attests, he’s a little evasive about under questioning:

Ouch! Assuming the accuracy of that transcript, it certainly doesn’t cast Hancock in the best light. For those of you who can’t see the video, it consists of an attorney grilling Hancock about his contributions from Metro Taxi before the PUC. Hancock initially answers “no” to questions about receiving money from Metro Taxi–presumably in a personal context–then is hit with record of his campaign donations. The overall effect is to make Hancock look conflicted arguing against more taxi competition.

Nevertheless, administrative judge Paul Gomez did deny Mile High Cab’s application last year. These decisions are based (in theory, anyway) or an assessment of service, and the PUC tries to balance the need for services under its regulation with demand. It’s worth noting that there are a lot of cab drivers, many of them recent legal immigrants from developing nations, in Hancock’s district today. One of Mile High’s selling points, said Greene in her column, is their lease rates charged to cabbies would be a fraction of that charged by the big competitors. So maybe downtown Denver doesn’t need more cabs, or maybe Metro Taxi just doesn’t want more competition–for customers or drivers.

Either way, say his opponents, you really can’t take Hancock’s word for it (see cartoon).

One thought on “Blind Spot: Hancock and Metro Taxi”

KColorado says:

February 11, 2011 at 4:16 pm

I’m guessing if Hancock helped a business in Cherry Creek or Wash Park or even…helped the Cupcake Truck and then that business donated, no one would have a problem.

It’s hard not to believe there is a racial/class element at play here. Hancock probably can’t play the race card, but he wouldn’t be unjustified if he did.

Log in to Reply

Login

Lost Password

Blind Spot: Hancock and Metro Taxi

Comments

One thought on “Blind Spot: Hancock and Metro Taxi”

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Recent Comments

Posts about

Posts about

Posts about

Posts about

Posts about

Newsletter