Printed letters, April 10, 2013

Thank you for the March 31 article highlighting the partnership between School District 51 and Community Hospital. Community has developed the Community Health Partnership to improve access to quality health care, encourage personal health awareness, focus on prevention and help manage rising health care costs.

I believe the most cost-effective place to receive health care is in a primary-care physician’s office. As the article underscored, District 51’s health insurance system was ailing. We have created a partnership that allows employees to take better care of their health by removing barriers to quality care.

District 51 employees have access to primary care services 24 hours a day, every day. They are guaranteed a primary care physician, basic lab work and most common medications at no cost.

From March 2012 to February 2013, there were nearly 3,400 patient visits from School District 51 employees at Grand Valley Primary Care and Grand Valley Urgent Care. Orchard Pharmacy filled more than 4,700 prescriptions. The district also realized a 50 percent increase in health screening participants.

As a result of the school district’s masterful improvements in its plan designs and its partnership with Community Hospital, the district saved more than $2.35 million in 2012. These are real dollars that District 51 can now reinvest in our children’s education.

In a time when most companies are seeing double-digit increases in their costs of health care, Community Hospital’s employer group partners are achieving the opposite. The school district’s costs are down 29 percent, year over year, and one of our first partners, Hanson International, has enjoyed a 19 percent decrease this year.

Community Hospital is proud to be a leader in developing innovative ways to improve the health of our community while lowering costs to individuals and businesses. Visit to learn more about Community Health Partnership services.


President and CEO

Community Hospital

Grand Junction

Chamber of Commerce urges 
extensive input on BLM plan

I read with interest the letter by Brandon Siegfried regarding the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce and the draft resource management plan for the Grand Junction BLM Field Office. It is notable that the letter begins with an admonition to “get the facts.” Seems like that is good advice for all.

Here are the facts. The Grand Junction Area Chamber has not yet submitted comments on the plan. The chamber fully intends to represent its member businesses and to weigh in on a plan that affects more than 1 million acres. The deadline for submission of comments is June 24.

I agree the travel management plan is an issue. The chamber comments, however, will likely not be limited to just that section of the plan. Many other areas will also impact the business community. The chamber will be thorough and specific in its comments.

This issue has already been reviewed twice in our regulatory oversight committee. Having recently provided comments on behalf of the business community regarding both the Colorado River Valley and the White River Field Office’s resource management plans, we have again concluded that merely saying we are against something is not useful in this process. Providing specifics is the key to being heard.

We also recognize that it is not just one person at the BLM who determines either the development or the adoption of a final plan as broad and comprehensive as a resource management plan.

Everyone has an opportunity to submit comments on this plan. We are urging broad participation in this process from our members in addition to comments from the chamber.


Chairman of the Board

Grand Junction Area 
Chamber of Commerce

Grand Junction


Publicizing many opinions is
essential part of democracy

I am amazed at the conservative culture of this wondrous Grand Valley. I have lived here for nearly three years, and I am still astounded at the prevalence of a collective body of voices who speak/write against progressive causes.

We are much better as a community if we pull together and seek out opinions from every sector of society. That includes our governor and the Legislature. I am pleased our state government is aiming to minimize the excess of gun violence by reasonable legislation.

There was a “shame on everyone” letter to the editor recently toward any citizen who didn’t agree with the letter writer. There is no logical reasoning for the tired arguments that any regulation regarding gun safety legislation is poisonous to Second Amendment “rights.”

I wish that those who advocate so strongly for Second Amendment issues would just as strongly advocate for educational programs such as Head Start for our young and precious kiddos.

Furthermore, a letter stating that the Associated Press advocated a side for abortion rights that should be judged as abominable, according to the writer, is allowable to be printed in our local newspaper, in my own humble opinion.

This is a democracy — not a plutocracy or an aristocracy. All articles and opinions should be welcomed, including those of a liberal press.




Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Page 1 of 1

In response to Valerie Etter:
Saying “There is no logical reasoning for the tired arguments that any regulation regarding gun safety legislation is poisonous to Second Amendment ‘rights’” is very literally tantamount to saying “there is no logical reasoning for the tired arguments in favor of individual liberty, self-ownership, self-determination and self-defense”. That is self-evidently false.
Ms. Etter also said, “I wish that those who advocate so strongly for Second Amendment issues would just as strongly advocate for educational programs such as Head Start for our young and precious kiddos.”
As I have said before, the Left always uses rhetorical brinksmanship, ad hominem and demonization against its ideological opponents instead of facts and logic. For example, they pretend to care “for the children” more, thus attempting to seize the moral high ground. Problem is, that sort of deception and manipulation ultimately destroys the very future that all children will inherit. Truth is, logic, reason, Golden-Rule-Ten-Commandments-like morality, and the U.S. Constitution with its Bill of Rights are the only the sustainable path “for the children” and all the rest of society.
Libertarians are philosophically opposed to government “educational” programs. Speaking for my libertarian-leaning self, what I would advocate strongly for is a computer for every child in every home, combined with internet access so children could take advantage of home schooling. That would save the cost of the brick-and-mortar brainwashing corrals which government schools have become. It would also save the unsustainable and irrational costs of government-sector unions to whom duopoly politicians inevitably pander for votes.
As for “for the children” socialization, the Left’s talking point of last resort against homeschooling and vouchers, the money saved on compulsory kid corrals could be used for better public libraries and community activity centers, complete with gyms and swimming pools.
Seems to me that is a paradigm which would prove that “libertarians” and “conservatives” care every bit as much, if not even more, “for our young and precious kiddos”, than the Left does.
Lastly, Ms. Etter calls America a “democracy”. False again. Any person who doesn’t understand the functional differences between a democracy and a constitutional republic is clueless anyway, thus demonstrating a conspicuous lack of credibility in the conversation.

Page 1 of 1

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050; M-F 8:00 - 5:00
Subscribe to print edition
eTear Sheets/ePayments

© 2017 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy