E-mail letters, Nov. 18, 2010
New governor should donate his salary to protect state parks
The proposed drilling and mining on Colorado State Park lands is a proposal without merit, and serves to demonstrate the blatant disregard for financial and fiscal responsibility on the part of elected officials throughout the state of Colorado who support it.
If those who support this proposal were actually concerned about the financial well-being of Colorado State Parks, they would find the money needed for the parks in their own budgets, instead adding injury to insult.
Perhaps this could be led by John Hickenlooper, multi-millionaire, who campaigned on the need for all to sacrifice: Let him donate his salary as governor of the state of Colorado to the Colorado State Parks.
JAMES C. HESS
Roan’s natural gas should be drilled
A trillion cubic feet of natural gas lies beneath the Roan Plateau — enough energy to heat all of Colorado’s homes for more than a decade. And still, some in the environmental community try to misrepresent just how much gas is up there. That’s just plain insincere.
Every cubic foot of gas is taxed by the state and the federal government. When hundreds of millions of cubic feet of gas are produced, that generates hundreds of millions for the state and the federal government. And hundreds of millions of dollars in new money for the state is hundreds of millions the state won’t have to cut from our schools or colleges.
But the most critical part? Western Colorado has nearly 10 percent unemployment and the Roan Plateau would provide decades of jobs for the areas contractors and small businesses. To say otherwise is just misleading.
Reporting against Meis has been biased
I attended Craig Meis’ press conference and feel that I must have been a different one than the press conference portrayed in The Daily Sentinel.
I did not find Mr. Meis to be defiant. He defended his right to appeal a ticket he received by requesting a jury trial and that is a right that every citizen has. When the jury ruled him guilty, he paid the charge and that should have been the end of this incident.
The Sentinel has stated that he intimidated and threatened the officer. Mr. Meis stated that he did not and I believe him. He is also accused of e-mailing the officer’s superior. Mr. Meis stated that he did e-mail the officer’s superior, after receiving the ticket, because he wanted to question the policy.
What is there that Tim Fenwic of GJ Result feels warrants a resignation on the part of Mr. Meis? Because of the biased reporting of this incident Mr. Meis is being held up as a pariah and there are some who feel he should resign for showing poor judgment.
Mr. Meis is a very mature solid thinking individual whose knowledge and experience in the energy field is an asset to Mesa County as a commissioner. Hopefully we do not have to go through the nasty process of fighting a recall. Mr. Meis has the support to prevail in such an action.
Former Forest Service officer sees Meis’ actions as negative
As a former Forest Service law enforcement officer, as well as a seasonal Colorado State Park Ranger, after retirement from the Forest Service, I read about this incident involving Commissioner Craig Meis with interest. I commend The Daily Sentinel for a good job of reporting, as is usually the case.
I commend the State Park Ranger who made the contact and issued the citation. Over the years in my experience I know what it’s like to deal with a law violator who feels that their position puts them somehow above accountability for their actions. If you disagree with the law, and think it’s frivolous, then you don’t have to obey it.
Is this what Commissioner Meis is teaching his son?
I personally find the actions and behavior of Craig Meis to be disgusting and I think it reflects in a negative way on all elected public officials who do conduct themselves with a high degree of integrity.
FRANK SWANCARA, JR
Commissioner used county resources to explain his actions
What an amazing and depressing spectacle we witnessed yesterday. A county commissioner righteously defending his right to be above the law and use his position and connections to try to escape being sanctioned for a clear violation of the law.
In addition, his press conference to explain his reasoning as to why he is special was held on county time in a county facility whereas the only county involvement was his attempt to use his county office to favorably influence the public about his personal, or his son’s, violation of the law.
But maybe what was more amazing was the very public exposition of the schism in what used to be a monolithic Republican party. I can understand one version — branch? — of the tea party’s complaint and request for Commissioner Meis to resign, but I find it very disturbing that the head of the local old-line Republican party actually defended the commissioner’s right to be above the law. What kind of citizens have some of us become?
But, then again, we went through eight years of just that sort of behavior at the highest levels nationally so I guess it’s understandable that local political officials would take their cue to endorse such behavior at the local level.
But the question is, how can we tell just who is entitled to scoff at the law while in the act unless some kind of visible identification is devised to identify for law enforcement just who is to be allowed violations without penalties? Maybe a big “R” tattooed on their foreheads?
Temper tantrums seem to be working
So, after reading the Nov. 17 edition of The Daily Sentinel, I have come to a conclusion. It is OK for an elected public official to abuse his authority by belittling a parks officer who issued him a ticket, mention several times that he is a county commissioner and knows the District Attorney in an attempt to intimidate the parks officer, and then justify his actions by saying he felt the violation was frivolous. And, that it is not OK for a transient to sneak aboard a bus because he has no money for a ticket. Even if the judge presiding over his case calls the charge lame.
The transient could face felony charges for his crime, while the county commissioner chooses which laws he will follow? How is that fair?
How has this particular county commissioner reacted in the past when someone has questioned his position? He has publicly belittled and threw a temper tantrum. I see a pattern here.
GARY E MOSS