Printed Letters: August 28, 2016
City should revise weed abatement plan
If it looked to the passerby that the weeds at First and Patterson (Northridge) were being neglected, look no more, as they have been cut, twice, and then sprayed twice! There was a reason for the hiatus of keeping pace with the weed growth. Read on:
My family is the property owner and my weed cutting was following a schedule until somebody helped himself to my Kubota Tractor (loader plus brush hog) by stealing it in April. That tractor was my main means of controlling weed growth and invasion. Without the tractor, I have had to bear the expense of renting a tractor once, which I don’t wish to do again.
I have asked the Northridge HOA to participate thrice, but had no response or follow through.
The special purpose of this letter is to thank some individuals who came to my rescue and helped me out in cutting the weeds on this property not once, but twice. They responded to my cry for help without wavering. I extend my sincere thanks to them for doing such a nice cutting, with such short notice.
This is an example where two different entities of public and private came together (I helped them previously) to help each other out — Grand Junction style. Love it!
As a final comment, from my many years of cutting weeds, I have a strong conviction and recommendation to the City Council to study and revise the weed abatement program. It is antiquated and ambiguous, and has created more animosity and consternation than it prevents, and it needs to be reinvented. The weeds are not just owned by the property owners, as they didn’t plant them or make them grow; the weeds belong to everybody in the valley and the removal, as with snow and ice similarly, should be shared by the public and the private sector together.
I am available to serve on a committee to research the abatement codes and to find more effective alternatives or modifications to the present codes for eradication of weeds.
City should consider restricting open burn season
I’m a runner. I run hard, which requires breathing hard. Last spring, while out for a run around Sherwood Park, I started to lose energy. It was difficult to move at all. I was able to finish my run but felt as if my lungs were taken away completely. I made it back home, but as soon as I stopped moving the coughing fits came. The coughing continued for five solid minutes and it was almost 30 minutes before I felt that I could breathe deeply again.
What happened? I am not an asthma sufferer. I am in great shape. I don’t smoke. What was wrong? One look toward the billowing black clouds around the valley made it obvious. I was choking on smoke and particulates from a half dozen or so fires. A brownish-yellow haze painted the hills around the valley.
Further, a neighbor was burning weeds in the alley we share behind my house. When I asked why he was burning, he said that he had a burn permit.
For five months out of the year, people can obtain a permit to burn. I understand that it is quick and easy to burn as opposed to making a dump run or to manage yard waste by hand, but I feel the health implications far outweigh the benefits. If it was hard for a healthy person like myself to breathe, I cannot imagine what it must be like for someone who struggles to breathe on a daily basis.
As Grand Junction takes steps to make this a healthy place to live and strives to develop an outdoor recreational industry, I think it wise that they should consider restricting the open burn season.
Let’s elect those who’ll punish child murderers fittingly
Bob Dylan sang “Everything is Broken.” But in all fairness, that’s only been true for the last 6,000 years of human history. A few lyrics: “Broken laws, broken bodies, broken bones, people bending broken rules…” The last line hit home in a revolting way this last week and inspired a question for any fellow citizen not brainwashed by the heartless ACLU or some feel-good “spiritual” nonsense.
Question: If one day’s Daily Sentinel front-cover story reports that a convicted child murderer is given a mere 32 years in prison, and another tells us there’s a caseload increase and funding decline at the Western Slope Center for Children, at an approximate cost of $50,000 per year to feed and care for a single convicted murderer who has, in any rational and compassionate society, forfeited their right to live ... how many children could instead be helped with that $1.6 million from taxpayers?
For extra credit, how many more children could be rescued from further abuse, and even murder, if members of a society ever chose to look beyond their personal and organizational agendas and stop coddling violent criminals? Before anyone answers with that worn-out, thoroughly refuted knee-jerk response about capital punishment qualifying as “cruel and unusual,” they should come down from their moral high horse and consider how criminals convicted of abusing children are treated by fellow prisoners.
This election will set the tone for how this nation responds to violent crime. If we have to be ruled by leaders who are (insert invective here) can’t we at least elect those who know enough to get this issue right? You know, for the children?