Printed letters, March 22, 2013
Thank you, Daily Sentinel, for pointing out the support for the challengers for City Council. It is no accident that the silent majority is awakening to the consequences of elections.
Business owners have been busy working, making payroll, raising their families and trusting that government will do the right thing.
However, in the past year, more than 1,500 properties would have been down-zoned if property owners had not stood up. One property owner was held up for six months in an effort to use his property, at a cost of $250,000, which he could have used in his business.
We worry about the feds in Washington, but private-property rights start right here. We are tired of over-regulation, fees on businesses that are passed on to the consumer and a decrease in high-paying jobs that affect our families and children.
We are tired of not being heard, as in testifying at hearings to deaf ears. We’re tired of hearing good intentions on overlay zoning plans and neighborhood centers that are then passed anyway — for the “common good,” which then deprive owners the use of their properties. Jobs are quality of life, too, besides the wonderful amenities we enjoy.
We don’t want our city to go broke, like other cities. It is not called a recovery when sales tax revenues continue to decline.
Our intention is for Grand Junction to continue to be the most livable city, and it will, with the right leadership and participation from each of us.
Brainard already misses too many local meetings
I cannot believe that The Daily Sentinel would endorse Rick Brainard for the City Council.
This is the same Brainard who resigned from Grand Junction Economic Partnership apparently because he did not have time to attend regular meetings. He did not attend meetings while he was serving on the Grand Junction airport security fence and hangar lease committee.
It is my understanding that he only attends about 20 percent of the Community Hospital Foundation board meetings. Recently, he wasn’t at the City Hall candidates forum.
How in the world can Brainard expect to have time for a seat on the City Council, which will require his daily attention to phone calls, studying issues, responding to citizen’s concerns, attending meetings and serving the public in so many ways.
My candidate is Bill Pitts. He works for the citizens of Grand Junction and gives the public his time and expertise. We don’t want a “no show” for the City Council.
Chazen’s accomplishments prove his leadership skills
I highly recommend Marty Chazen for City Council District D.
His leadership skills have been a breath of fresh air for Grand Junction.
His problem-solving skills are razor sharp, and his financial acumen has saved School District 51 thousands of dollars. I have had the opportunity to see first-hand many of Chazen’s's skills. Chazen serves on District 51’s Budget Advisory Committee, of which I am co-chair.
Once again, I am very proud of Chazen’s accomplishments in the community. He is fair and innovative, and he is a great listener and friend to all. Please vote for our kids’ future. Vote Chazen in District D.
DR. BARBARA ANN SMITH
Citizens should elect new talent to council
Jim Spehar wrote a fairly good column last week. And I’m probably not the first to point out to him that he spelled Marty Chazen’s name incorrectly.
Chazen is the very smart gentleman who is running for City Council. Spehar wrote a fairly well-reasoned piece, and I appreciated it.
He also mentioned the candidates and their big blue signs. So, I’m sure everyone is well aware of who these candidates are. There are a number of new names such as Chazen, Duncan McArthur, Phyllis Norris and Rick Brainard.
I’ve heard them speak and like what they have to say. All four want to change the status quo of City Council and make our city much more business-friendly.
Jobs should be the top priority of the city fathers, and these four will work to get the job done.
They all have many years of both business and financial experience and understand that government doesn’t create jobs, businesses do.
The citizens of Grand Junction would do well to vote for these four candidates.
BLM takes right direction in trimming number of roads
I, for one, believe the proposal from the BLM is the right thing to do — reduce the number of roads. Many folks (as depicted on the front page of the March 16 edition of The Daily Sentinel) believe they are not being heard, and feel the BLM should start over.
While my personal opinion is for significantly reducing even further the number of roads available to travel on, I do believe in multiple use and am willing to compromise. But there is nothing that interrupts a walk in the great outdoors more than an ATV zooming down a trail.
Multiple use means something for everyone, and why should I not be able to get to a quiet location within a short drive from Grand Junction and the Grand Valley? There are very few locations these days where ATVs are not allowed.
Furthermore, animals — especially deer and elk — need quiet, roadless areas as well.
The letter to the editor about the BLM “creating sign pollution,” published in a recent edition of the paper, is the goofiest remark I have ever heard. If ATV users would stay off closed roads to begin with, signs would not be required or could be reduced.
Yes, “sign pollution” could be controlled by only posting signs on open roads (with the assumption that roads were closed otherwise), but we all know that would be heavily abused, with no way to control it. At least now we know when a road is closed or open, but we still have no way to identify illegal ATV riders.
Why is it that I have never seen a public argument from ATV clubs or users in favor of larger identification markers on ATVs to allow themselves and others to police illegal off-road use?
KARL VAN CALCAR
Penry’s aim was off regarding Colorado’s brand
In his March 15 column, Josh Penry earned his paycheck as a gun-rights advocate, but he flunked as a branding consultant.
He excoriates the Legislature for spending time on gun regulations, not on jobs bills. This is evidence to him that Colorado’s “brand has major league problems.”
He should stop viewing the state through the limited perspective of a rifle scope and look at what really attracts companies, workers and new residents who’ll spend money here.
You won’t find guns ranking highly among criteria for best places to live, work or do business. But on more relevant measures, Colorado’s brand looks pretty good:
✓ No. 5 on Forbes’ Best States for Business (and No. 1 for labor supply).
✓ No. 4 on the Kaufman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity.
✓ No. 2 in the Gallup Poll’s Happiest States ranking.
✓ No. 6 on MoneyRates Best States for Retirement.
✓ No. 6 of the 30 Best Places to Work by Outside Magazine (more than any other state).
Perhaps the gun lobby is the only client still willing to take branding advice from the Colorado GOP.