Letters to the Editor, Dec. 18

Council’s board appointments puzzling

I find two recent city board appointments rather puzzling.

The first was Councilman Gabe Santos’ appointment to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Council members were asked to list their top five choices for board appointments weeks ago and Santos gave no indication that he was the least bit interested in Planning and Zoning. Yet when board appointments were being voted on, he announced that he wanted to be onto this board.

It seemed strange that he would change his mind at the last minute but what seemed really strange was that Mayor Bryan Baum and council members Katie Witt and Alex Sammoury would support this apparently hasty decision. This despite the fact that councilwoman Sarah Levison was already serving on the board, had previously indicated that it was her top choice for board appointments and was much more qualified for the position than was Santos.

It seemed a rather harsh rebuke and left me wondering: Why didn’t Councilman Santos declare his intention to seek the position on the Planning and Zoning Commission when he was originally given the opportunity to?

How did each of the supporting council members come to the same last-minute conclusion that the best thing for Longmont would be to ignore the hard work and devotion of one council member in favor of the whim of another?

Was this actually not a spontaneous decision at all, but rather one the four of them agreed upon, in private, before the public meeting?

The other appointment I found puzzling was Chris Rodriguez to the Airport Advisory Board. Baum, Witt, Sammoury and Santos voted Against the vice chair of the committee — a well-qualified and highly respected committee member, in favor of someone who didn’t even show up for his committee interview but who is a vocal supporter of the new council.

Fair and open? You decide.

Paula Burr
Longmont

Niwot church should move to Longmont

We have long opposed the expansion of the Rocky Mountain Christian Church. It will create an urban facility in size and intensity of use. It violates the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan and will negatively impact safety and quality of life in “semi-rural” Niwot. We urged that the Boulder County Commissioners deny the proposed expansion, which they did. A federal court ruled against them. We support the commissioners in filing an appeal.

Instead of building out to a 23,800-square-foot campus, why doesn’t RMCC move north to Longmont, where many of its members live? The Twin Peaks Mall is nearly empty and has ample parking. Wouldn’t it make more sense to reuse an existing facility than to build this mammoth complex in semi-rural Niwot?

Mary and Tim Jolly
Niwot

Shop local’ campaign gets hypocritical start

I just read your article about the City of Longmont’s campaign to keep money in town (Dec. 13). I find it very curious that the city hired a Denver ad agency for the campaign when a local Main Street agency (Shift) was trying to get the business.

Isn’t it ironic that a local business didn’t get the city’s business when it is trying to encourage people to shop local? What a bunch of hypocrites.

I follow advertising closely and have yet to see any of the campaign that Adrenalin has put out there. Obviously not very effective or in time for the holidays.

Come on City of Longmont, support your own small businesses.

Mike Veeder
Longmont

Colorado plan covers pre-existing conditions

I just saw a letter to the editor from a man who had two liver transplants (Dec. 13). It seems that he does not realize that for those with pre-existing conditions in Colorado there is cover-colorado.org.

The federal government is not known for the wisdom of its health-care provisions (research the Rosebud Sioux and the care many of our veterans are getting). I believe there are other alternatives and Colorado already has an indigent-care program for those awaiting SSI and Cover Colorado for those who can not get health insurance in the open market.

I am especially concerned by the sudden “urgency” behind the health-care bill. Urgent bills (like TARP) cause the most damage.

Paula Nelson
Longmont

Judge layoffs send distressing message

I am deeply concerned and disturbed by the layoff of two Boulder County judges and I am sure that many agree that this news is outrageous. While I understand that District Court Judge Roxanne Bailin was “just doing her job” by choosing whom on her staff would be cut, I think we need to look closely at the message these choices give to specific populations.

Magistrate T.J. Cole is the only judge serving the juvenile population. His track record shows that his brand of justice is to serve the great good of the community. The tight ship he runs in his court room, the high regard that he is held in by juveniles, parents, lawyers and probation officers, therapists and others is commendable. I know this personally because many years ago I appeared numerous times in Cole’s courtroom with my son, Jesse White. At that time, there was no Justice High. Perhaps, if it had been an option, my son would be alive today. Perhaps.

What message are we sending our community, and the youth of our community who are in trouble with the law, when we cut the judge and justice figure who has done so much to earn their trust and respect? I believe the message we send is that youth, especially those in trouble with the law, do not count for much, therefore, their judge is expendable. I believe the loss of this position will allow for more youth to fall through the large and severe crack that Judge Bailin has opened in the juvenile-justice system.

I do not know Magistrate Fred Clifford of the small claims court. What I do know is that small claims court is often used by those who cannot afford a lawyer to fight their legal battles. Again, I know this from my own experience. According to the article Magistrate Clifford’s track record also shows that his brand of justice is to serve the greater good of the community. His referral program has allowed those with economic challenges to remain off the streets and saved them from homelessness. I can easily believe that magistrate Clifford has also earned the respect and regard of those with economic challenges and others who have sought justice though his courtroom. What message are we sending to the community and those who rely on the wisdom of a small-claims court when we cut the judge who serves them?

Rev. Maureen ‘Mo’ White
Boulder

Question foreign policy – it’s patriotic

Nation building should start in the United States and be limited to domestic issues. We have plenty of issues that need addressing: jobs, health care, education, democracy, economic disparity, etc. We could certainly use some of the enormous financial resources used fighting special-interest wars to fix our domestic challenges.

We don’t need to sacrifice our young men to support corporate interest abroad. Bringing wars to a successful conclusion means propping up corrupt puppet governments to do the bidding of American special interests.

Afghanistan’s future should be determined by Afghans. We may not like it, but we aren’t the deciders of a nation’s sovereignty. We aren’t the only country threatened by terrorism. We can’t impose our values and morals on other countries in the name of American national interest. We certainly have the right to protect ourselves but not to determine the political structure of other countries.

Using fear of terrorism to justify our foreign escapades is dangerous. We are not made safer internally by the collateral damage we cause internationally. If al Qaeda is such a direct threat to America, then allow them to come out of their holes in the mountains of Pakistan, where they would be easier to attack. If the al Qaeda leadership is eliminated so is our necessity for being in Afghanistan and so is our image as the world’s greatest bully.

Questioning our foreign policy isn’t unpatriotic; it is a free expression of our democracy. Understanding why we are viewed unfavorably by many middle-east countries doesn’t make us less powerful. We can’t bomb are way to peace, we must recognize the legitimate concerns of others. This isn’t appeasement; it is exercising our power in a fair and responsible way.

Richard Hansen
Longmont