Printed Letters: September 20, 2017

Letter on climate change 
was narrow-minded

I’m surprised by Kenneth Wirtz’s narrow-minded view of global warming/climate change in the Sept. 15 paper. He states, “You don’t have to be a climate denier to question the conclusions of so many.”

I question those few who’ve received compensation and manipulated facts to create “fake news” and appease those who profit at our (human and Earth) expense. Ninety-seven percent of reputable scientists all agree there are changes going on. Not that we’ve necessarily caused it, but we’re influencing it.

It’s odd he suggests there’s “so little actual causative data.” Not paying attention to oil companies he supports? They made it known in the ‘70s that their oil harvesting and processing, and our consumption at those rates, would cause an impact to our atmosphere, and it has.

He only goes back 131 years to 1886. Steam power was developed in the early 19th century. Facts from the Weather Channel — 16 of the last 17 years have been the hottest and our storms aren’t just major storms, but are record setters. There are also Antarctic ice cores that show years of pollution progressing through our industrial age. Too young to remember the steel cities, factories, and coal-fired power plant pollution turning white snow to black? Remember how critical pollution became in cities like Denver, Los Angeles, and even the Grand Valley? Smog? Air pollution from drilling rigs and toxic methane releases in California?

With so many Superfund problems, do we try to fool ourselves any longer? RoundUp pesticide has finally been shown to be a carcinogen. We’re not just damaging our Earth; we’re damaging each other. Many of the nuclear power plants we’re told are totally safe, have been leaking radiation for years.

Pinpointing a smoking gun cause for atmospheric changes is as pointless as dreaming President Trump always tells the truth.


Public needs to know how tax increases will be spent

After reading the Sunday Sentinel I feel compelled to comment on the upcoming tax initiatives for the public safety tax increase and the 3A/3B tax increase for the District 51 school system. I have read all of the impassioned pros and cons that the Sentinel has published. One thing that has been missing from those entities that desire more money, is what I will be getting for my money. No one has produced any performance metrics for the additional monies. Before I vote for any increase I would like to have the following information:

From the sheriff: What are the numbers of incident reports in each of your patrol districts. These need to be itemized by day of the week, time of occurrence, nature of complaint and number of officers assigned to those districts by time and day. How you would use the additional money to reduce these incidents. What benchmark or metric you would use to assign or reassign patrol officers? What results should the public expect from the additional monies requested and what is your plan if those results are not met? How often would you communicate this data to the public?

What I am looking for is a plan for the additional monies. A simple statement of “I need to get back where we were; I need more officers or more equipment” will not suffice.

Tell me how my money will be spent and what results I can expect.

From the District 51 school board: Same as the sheriff. What is your plan and how will I know if it is working and what if it does not work? Will you give me my money back?

I have no doubt that there are improvements needed in public safety and education. My doubt is your collective ability to deliver those improvements. These needs did not just appear they have been ongoing. The school buildings did not just fall into disrepair nor did the crime statics suddenly spike. What have you folks been doing? Maybe the best solution is to start with a fresh school board and new sheriff.


Vote for school funding and a brighter future for children

The proposed School District 51 funding increase is strongly needed if our children are to be educated to live and compete in the 21st century they live in.


• We have fewer days of school than other districts in the state and the nation.

• Many of our school building are out of date and in disrepair.

• Our teachers are paid less than competing districts in the state.

I have always believed that the American way is to provide a better future for our children than we have currently. I also know that education is the pathway to future success in life. If we deny our children that opportunity, we make them less competitive and less prepared for the future they will inherit. There will be no American dream for them.

Is that what we want? I think not. I encourage you to vote for school funding and for a brighter future for our children.

Grand Junction


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

Until I see or hear a consise and logical reason why the children in District 51 only go to school for 165 days a year while the rest of the state go for 180 days AND see the detailed plan on how 3A and 3B are going to address this specific problem, I will not vote for 3A or 3B.

Mr. Blosser, as much as you would like to say it is mismanagement it is lack of funding. If you can’t accept that then run for the school board and see for your self. Or straighten things out, if neccessary. You do want your voice heard, don’t you?

In the meantime, my opinion is that you are the heart of the problem. Unless you went to private schools you have the willing public to thank for your education. People paid their taxes to support you. Now it is your turn. Strangely enough, older people in the past understood that and felt a responsibility to the welfare of society. You are apparently not of that mind set.

Mr Borgen
  Again you show your ignorance of what I said.  Before I vote to spend money on something, I want a plan on what it will be spent on and how it will fix the problem.  That should even be easy for you to undestand and accept.  All we are getting are horror stories with no detailed plans on how to fix the problems except to throw more money at them.  It is called accountability.

Mr. Blosser, what you want is an excuse not to pay taxes. Which, if any, of the Dist 51 Board is incompetent to decide where money should be spent? You pay people to speak and act on your behalf. If you don’t like what they do, run for office or take steps to vote them out of office. Your implication of stupidity of the issues on my behalf is childish, at best. If you bother to read any of the statistics you’ll know that the District is severely underfinanced and it is nearly impossible to keep up with the chore they have signed up for. if you can do better and furnish an elaborate plan that certain locals want to hold them to then step right up and do it. Otherwise, your complaints sound like the usual excuses to not pay your fair share. You seem full of good of intentions but are more interested in being a bystander critic. Step up and participate

Mr Borgan
  I do pay my fair share!  And I will use my vote to try and select Board Members that show the capability to expain the problems and come up with detailed plans to solve them My comment was not an excuse to not pay my fair share but about accountability!!

  By the way, I agree with your comments about the North Avenue name change in the e-mail letters.  I plan on voting against the council members that voted for the name change.

Mr. Blosser, Right! Accountability. Based on all your previous posts I think my assumptions regarding your motivation was correct. If it sounds and walks like a duck, etc. Was my guess about your own education not correct?

Mr Borgen
  My education is not the issue.  You are very tiresome so adieu.

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