Hi Rick-

Trying to understand the tortured prose.  ??  Translation please:

“...while the purchase of items actually necessary for the safety and comfort of the citizenry is considered at the micro-biotic level of priorities…”

Thanks.  From what I can tell that makes no sense, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume there is at least an attempt to impart meaning. 

While it does certainly fill up column space, I don’t think previous zoning constitutes a future contractual obligation.  But you are the one with a law degree.  (?!).  Did you know livestock was once permitted in downtown Grand Junction?  That mill tailings were OK for fill dirt? 

The public’s sense of best use, and zoning and all that changes, which is part of the reason we don’t elect a City Council For Life. 

It is more about location—as I am sure you know, the mangling of language aside—than banning transport businesses that use diesel. 

But making your point without using hyperbole, made up binary zero-sum renderings of any issue large or small, and made up silliness would apparently be impossible.  For you anyhow. 

And obviously the city should not build any more trails if people that you don’t care for might use them.