E-mail letters, Jan. 21, 2010
Sentinel article provided
incorrect data on ballot items
The Jan. 18 article with its fabrications about the three citizen petitions on the November ballot was disappointing, but predictable.
The Daily Sentinel reporter didn’t even give supporters one whole sentence for their side, nor did she verify the self-serving claims by the city bureaucrat. who naturally hates tax relief.
The reporter should have first read the Web sites for the ballot issue. At the very least, she should have listed them — COtaxreform.com, LimitPropertyTax.com, and LimitCOdebt.com — so readers could see how distorted city’s claims and the Sentinel article were.
And whatever happened to the law that said governments cannot spend public money campaigning against ballot issues? Would some citizen like to enforce that with
a complaint to the secretary of state? The city’s report was not only false, it was illegal.
I will bet the city bureaucrat her job against mine that the cost to Grand Junction in 2011
is not “more than 10 percent of its budget.” It will not even be 5 percent. It might slow the growth rate of city increases 1 percent or 2 percent. The Sentinel reporter repeated those bogus claims without verifying them, which shows her bias.
Claims made by the city are false. The measures guarantee debts will be paid. Amendment 61 prohibits voting on leases. There is no financial impact on any school district because state aid must make up the difference by law. The state, not the city, collects vehicle registration “fees,” and Proposition 101 would lower that fee back to the government’s true cost in processing the paperwork — $10 per vehicle for everyone
The Sentinel won’t allow space to refute all the standard scare tactics the city used to threaten voters with loss of popular and basic services. If they’re screaming, “It’s the end of the world!” in January, how much more hysterical will they get by October?
Readers should simply go to the Web sites and read the home pages, summaries and analyses. It’s a shame your journalist did not do that simple research to write a truthful report.
GarCo Planning Commission
seeking input on 2030 plan
The Garfield County Planning Commission is seeking public input for the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan 2030. Input from the citizenry is integral in decision-making regarding the future growth and continued vitality of Garfield County.
The next round of public input meetings is being held on the following dates and locations:
Feb. 2 — Glenwood Springs Community Center and Silt Burning Mountain Fire Station No. 1.
Feb. 3 — Rifle Health & Human Services Building and the Carbondale Recreation Center.
Feb. 4 — Parachute/Battlement Mesa Activity Center and the New Castle Community Center.
All meetings will begin at 6:00 p.m. and run until 8:30 p.m. Citizen attendance and involvement is critical to this decision-making process and I hope many will be able to attend.
Phil Vaughan, Chairman
Garfield County Planning Commission
Brown victory shows
importance of perception
There’s no doubt now that Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts on Tuesday turned politics on its ear and made the conservatives giddy. But, Brown is not conservative, just not a (D), and most notably, not a Kennedy. His great accomplishment was having broken a political grip that had endured for decades. Apparently the liberal voters there perceived him to be the lesser of two evils.
Changing the status quo in Washington was what many Bay Staters hoped would come with President Obama’s stated goals and eventual election. That happened, but, the changes apparently weren’t what they envisioned. Instead, they saw changes, perceived to be crippling and perceived there were more to come. It took the siren song of health care socialism to jolt them out of voting for a (D).
The message has been sent, through two previous governor races, and now this. Politicians beware! Perception can be a very real factor.
Is this the beginning of a trend, or a fluke times three, as some Democrats would have us believe?