Why does the city need to subsidize the NRC with hundreds of thousands of dollars? Whenever the NRC was discussed, even as recently as the end of July, there were loud denunciations every time I suggested that the NRC would be subsidized by the City. Administrator Lewis clearly told a member of the public at a city council meeting that the city would not and could not give the NRC its utility lines for free, and that the city would not subsidize the NRC. Various members of the council have echoed this position. Now we find out that the city is doing exactly what it said it would not do.

The city is giving the NRC hundreds of thousands of dollars in subsidy. The city is giving the NRC land that the NRC will sell to raise money. The city could sell that land and put the money into the general fund, but instead will just give to the NRC. According to Jack Lewis the NRC will sell the land and use the money to pay for the water and sewer lines to the property. No numbers have been released, but 15 acres in the city of Salida has to be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

There has been no discussion of why and how the financials of the 6320 have deteriorated so badly and so quickly. What was unthinkable just weeks ago – a direct subsidy to the NRC by the city – is now such a given that there is no discussion of it. What went wrong? Were the financials screwed up in the first place, and we just figured it out? Did something terrible happen in the last few weeks? Was this the plan all along?

The trouble with this subsidy is the way it is being done. We aren’t told how much it is. It is not going through the regular process for people who want money from the city. There are many projects and organizations that provide services to the citizens and businesses of Salida, and they often look to the City for monetary help: Neighbor to Neighbor, the Chaffee Housing Trust, the People’s Clinic, the community center, SBA, even the airport. All of these organizations could use 15 acres of city land to sell to raise money for their worthy endeavours. They are instead forced to compete with each other and with the normal and regular operations of the city for a finite amount of money through the regular public budgeting process. And from experience, I can tell you there is often a great deal of scrutiny of the organizations, their budgets and plans, and a weighing of the benefit of the service they provide.

Not so the NRC – which is given hundreds of thousands of dollars with no questions asked and no discussion, so far, of why it is suddenly necessary to provide a subsidy to a project we were told would not need one. No discussion of an amount. No weighing of the benefits, if any, provided to the citizens of the city. No comparison of what else might be done with that money. No balancing against the identified need for new police cars, fire trucks or infrastructure improvements.

Everyone who is in a position to know is silent on the sudden and desperate need for a subsidy to make the NRC a viable project. The only way to even try to get an answer is through the city council.

Is anyone willing to show up on September 13 and ask why we should subsidize the NRC in this way, or what happened to make the subsidy necessary? Is the NRC willing to at least have open meetings and open books in exchange for the subsidy, or will they continue to operate in the back room? I guess we will find out onTuesday (Sept 13, see below).

Salida City Council meetings are held at 6:00 PM on the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month in the Touber Building at 448 E. 1st Street. -Cit Team

I find it hard to comprehend the outcry against the QUC. What’s wrong with a conservation-based organization which “supports preserving and promoting traditional use and enjoyment of quiet areas on our public lands and waters”, and is working to restore balance to our public lands and waters?  I applaud its effort to take on what may be a “quiet cause” – an “unpopular” one in the face of a highly-organized, well-funded and vocal opposition.

From the standpoint of noise intrusion, the multiple use – or shared use – concept of land use is a farce. Motorized noise intrudes on all other land users activities – it has long-ranging capabilities to nullify the natural sounds, and to negatively affect a “traditional’ (non-motorized) recreational user’s experience.

That being noted, I am well aware of the controversy that exists – to grant one interest group certain rights and access in specific areas appears to “take away from” or reduce another group’s overall access and equality on their terms. Public land is open to all, right?

Except in extreme cases of abuse, I’d agree. Case in point – I enjoy riding motorcycles and snowmobiles – adrenaline-inducing activities – but I wouldn’t feel right about having a good time at the expense of others who are in the same outdoor rec area. I’d like to consider myself sensitive to everyone’s needs, which is why I think the operative word here is “Compromise”.

This is where both sides weigh in; in my work with mediation, I facilitate mutually-agreeable solutions – (note: not all sides are “thrilled’ with the solution – but at least willing to see the other side and work towards an agreement they both can live with.)

In defining Compromise:
“- a settlement in which each side gives up some demands or makes concessions
- an adjustment of opposing principles, systems, etc. by modifying some aspects of each – the result of such an adjustment
- something midway between two other things in quality, effect, etc. “

So if there needs to be “Separate Use” areas – so be it. There’s a time and a place for everything. Not all things everywhere.

Quiet users and motorized recreationists have been compared to “smokers versus non-smokers.” Each is unable to co-exist peacefully with the other – separate areas and restrictions had to be constructed for a peaceable existence in the smoking situation – why not in the recreational arena?

Fortunately, there is a middle-ground that can be reached between motorized and non-motorized recreational users of public lands. Separate use areas are only one answer. Another way to mitigate potential user conflict is be involved in your local Travel Management Planning process with the BLM and Forest Service officials. Personal user input provides vital insight for the land use managers to consider in trail designation and whether a trail stays open or closed to motorized vehicles.

For years, conservationist groups, the BLM and National Forest Service (NFS) have identified the unmanaged recreation, particularly off-road vehicle use, as one of the major threats to our public lands. Former NFS Chief Mike Dombeck singled out ATVs as among the major threats to America’s forests and other public lands several years prior.

So conflict exists – it’s how we resolve it, keeping open-minds and integrity intact – that is the real issue. Resorting to underhanded measures such as vandalism and flagrant disregard of areas set aside for quiet use, (such as the mention of dirt bikers in Castle Garden which I read in Ed Quillen’s blog – I was actually hiking with my mentee and my dogs there at the time) is disturbing and leaves one wanting fairness and equality for all.

Patty LaTaille

Donated cell phones that are in good working condition will be cleared of information and loaned for use as 911 Emergency phones for adult and child victims currently living in a violent home, or who have recently left a violent home. During an abusive incident phones are often torn out of walls or taken from the victim. Due to isolation from the abuser, the victim may not be allowed phone access. Children are also given 911 cell phones to call for help in the case that their abused parent cannot call, or if they are being abused themselves. Your old cell phone may provide a critical link between a victim of domestic violence who is in a life threatening emergency and 911 emergency services.
AADA’s cell phone fundraiser program is sponsored by Shelter Alliance (www.shelteralliance.net), a program of cell phone recycling company GRC Wireless Recycling (www.grcrecycling.com). Through Shelter Alliance, AADA is able to raise funds through the collection & recycling of used cell phones. All proceeds from the cell phone recycling program directly benefit victims of domestic violence and sexual assault in our own community, giving them the tools and resources necessary to begin a life free from abuse.

AADA is a non-profit organization serving victims of domestic violence and sexual assault in Chaffee County. In 2010, AADA served 236 adult and child victims with crisis intervention, emergency safehousing, support groups, advocacy, financial assistance and peer counseling. All services provided by AADA are FREE and CONFIDENTIAL. Over the last two years, AADA has seen an increase in the number of victims needing services and in the severity of violence experienced by these victims while also experiencing significant cuts in grant funding.

Wireless phone models and equipment from any carrier may be dropped off at 1539 G Street, Salida Monday through Friday 830am – 430pm. The donation of your old or used cell phone is tax-deductible.

Sincerely,
Cristyl Hill
Youth Advocate

Alliance Against Domestic Abuse
P.O. Box 173
Salida, CO 81201
719-539-7347
fax 719-539-2005
chill@qwestoffice.net
www.salidaalliance.org

In the late 19th century, Thomas Edison was locked in a battle with the entrepreneur George Westinghouse and the legendary inventor Nikola Tesla. The Niagara Falls Power Company offered a $100,000 prize for anyone who could develop a method to transmit electricity long distance. Some geniuses favoured alternating current while others favored direct current.

Edison argued that alternating current was highly dangerous and “impractical”. He demonstrated the electrocution of numerous animals to show the press and the public the danger of A/C. http://www.boingboing.net/2008/01/03/edison-electrocuted.html

Alternating current was dangerous economically to Edison and his new company, General Electric. They were set up to exploit direct current (DC)and would lose their advantages if the world went with alternating current. He even went so far as to commission an electric chair as part of the campaign.

Tesla created an effective alternating current (AC) transmission system that would be adapted worldwide. In 1883, Westinghouse created an illumination system for Niagara Falls using AC current.

After a fact-based analysis, alternating current was chosen for Niagara Falls in the 1890s, it clearly worked and all the hysteria and fear were gone. History has shown A/C to be clearly superior to D/C for most applications. Edison came to regret his off-base calculations, as well as his tactics.

Coal vs. Natural Gas

Fast forward to today. Last week in the New York Times an article titled “Gas Wells Recycle Water, but Toxic Risks Persist” was yet another example of the Fear campaign to scare people about the dangers of natural gas production.

Was this a well balanced, fact-based dialogue on how to address the problems of an energy source that can so dramatically help our Country on each of the 3 fundamental criteria that we should be using to make energy decisions today ?

1. Economic Viability
2. Economic Security
3. Environmental Soundness

Or are we falling into the same pattern that emerged in the 19th century with regards to alternating current vs. direct current ?

Much like the safety considerations with alternating current, the concerns with fracking and water are legitimate and must be addressed.
It is essential in our Country that issues be discussed in a rational manner to avoid a situation where Fear rules, as opposed to a constructive, fact-based dialogue.

The challenges of dealing with water and natural gas fall into 3 categories:

A. Real Problems: The produced water from the fracking process has some troubling elements in it and while it is a solvable problem, this is what we should be focused on. We should also be focused on the amount of water that is required for this process and a way to minimize this cost. Water will be an increasingly precious commodity, and can’t simply be trading off water for energy.

B. Disposal Process: The purification and disposal of water from the hydraulic fracturing process, which is where the real issues are, relate to whether the companies are using the known best practices to avoid problems caused by faulty execution. Some of the problems today caused from natural gas exploration are simply poor execution with regards to how to dispose of the waste-water, and this should and can be easily fixed.

C. Misperceptions: The fact that people continue to think that natural gas drilling affects the aquifer is a misperception. Once the facts are understood, this will not be a serious consideration.

In recent years there’s been a handful of cases where groundwater in the proximity of fracked gas wells has allegedly been contaminated, some say by fracking chemicals, some say by gas infiltrating the water table through an improperly completed well.

In short, if water reservoirs are ever contaminated it’s because of a problem with how wells are cased close to the surface, not because frack chemicals are oozing up from miles underground.

It comes down to how the well is cased.

The benefits of natural gas, specifically our ability to exploit the trillions of dollars worth of shale gas and oil and it’s benefits are enormous and to see it get sidetracked for even a year with a Fear based campaign like the one Edison ran against alternating current are very real.

The stakes are much too high. Now is not the time to be frying animals to scare people. Now is the time to work on solutions.

I’m writing this letter to provide information that most do not have, and, as your mission statement states, have “opinions based on misinformation”. I’ve followed this from the beginning because I built the building in question. Any points I make can be confirmed by review of the court transcript, filings, petitions, answers, orders, covenants etc. I’m familiar with them all, plus many additional letters, e-mails and minutes. I attended the entire trial proceedings and have seen all the associated documents. Some may consider me biased but so are those who refuse to discuss the matter or, ‘frankly, do not trust’ her (Judith Gilbert) because she petitioned the Mesa Village Homeowners Association to keep her garage. The Mesa Village Homeowners Association Board of Directors petitioned the Association to prevent it. Where is the trust?

The covenants, at that time, did not address, or exclude, this building. The dissenting Board’s actions were, essentially, to delay this structure until restrictions could be put in the covenants against it. Their own documents state this. Their original denial letter listed several reasons, none of which were addressed in the covenants, or they were set aside at trial. There were only two letters of complaint, each from two story homeowners. Letters of support were ignored.

The covenants stated that a project’s denial “may be based solely on aesthetics”.

The covenants stated that objections by neighbors were not grounds for denial.

The covenants stated nothing about rental, except for the size of the “for rent” sign that can be posted. The Board insisted that, if rented, the property would become commercial and not allowed by the covenants. This objection was set aside in Court. This structure is across the street from rented duplexes. Several homes in the sub-division are regularly rented.

The property in question is zoned single/multi family.

The covenants have since been changed to reflect the views of the Board, but not necessarily those of the membership.

Early in this process, the majority of the Association Members voted NOT to take this matter to court but the Board claimed that the matter was “ordered” to Court. It was not. The Court ordered the parties to ‘set a date’ for trial. Most people know that many dates are set for court only for resolution to be reached before actually going to court. The Court later claimed that the matter was intended to go to Court, but there was no such specific ‘Order of the Court’ to do so, and the wishes of the membership were ignored. The Board used the vagueness of this situation to their advantage and moved the matter to Court.

During the construction of the building, the Court failed to sustain two stop work orders, stating that the objections of the Board ‘did not rise to the level’ of the restriction they claimed and the objection appeared to be to the ‘purpose of the building, not appearance’. Yet, during trial, the Court stated that it did not uphold these orders because there was ‘insufficient information’ to adequately rule. At the time of trial, the structure was 95% complete.

Sadly, the Court refused to accept testimony of a similar building, perhaps larger, certainly as tall (living space over a garage), that was built in the sub-division before the current Board’s tenure and without opposition. At trial, there was the unsubstantiated claim that this structure had no kitchen and, therefore, was not an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). It appears from its findings that the Court feels that a kitchen (an ADU has a kitchen) will cause the structure to ‘obscure the sky’ and, therefore, not comply with the covenants because it will block a neighbor’s view. The offer was made to remove the kitchen from Ms. Gilbert’s building.

During trial, each of the three opposing Board members testified that they, “did not consider aesthetics”.

In the Court’s ruling, it was stated that the covenants ‘do not define aesthetics’, but that it was apparent that the term meant…..and went on to supply the definition as interpreted by the Court. Aesthetics, I find, is defined as many things from an area of philosophy to the perception of the beholder. Subsequently, the project was denied by the Court, using the definition supplied by the Court, on grounds that the dissenting Board Members testified they didn’t consider and in direct opposition to the covenants (aesthetics and neighbor opposition).

A past Colorado Appeals Court case from Park County (Allen vs. Reed, 155P 3rd 443) decided that the Court may not enter it’s own definition, or accept any definition not contained in the restriction (covenants). To do so is to have the Court re-write the covenants and, therefore, change the contract between the Association and the homeowner. This case also determined that any definition subject to more that one reasonable interpretation is considered ‘ambiguous’, and in such case, any ruling must be made in favor of private property rights, in this case, Ms. Gilbert’s building.

The above referenced case also comes into play in the Order of the Court. At trial, the defendant, her attorney, the Board, their attorney, the City Planner and others testifying at trial all referred to the structure, an ADU, as a living quarters over the garage. There were no stated objections to the garage itself. The complaint was the height of the structure, 2 stories, even when bordered by 2 story homes. The City allows ADU’s in all zones of the City. They may be placed on lots of certain minimal size where existing structures do not take up a certain percentage of the lot. Ms. Gilbert’s lot is one of only a few in the sub-division meeting the criteria due to her small house on a large lot. There are height and set back limits, they are limited to a two-person occupancy and may not be more than 700 SF. They can be attached, free standing or over a garage.

In the Court’s Findings and Order, it was stated that the defendant constructed an ‘ADU of 1400 SF consisting of 700 SF of garage below and 700 SF of living quarters above’. This description is not at all in keeping with the descriptions presented during trial, is not consistent with the City’s definition of an ADU and is contrary to the findings of Allen vs. Reed because there is more than one reasonable interpretation. When asked for clarification, the Court again failed to take notice of the inconsistency and apparent errors of its rulings. While the Board, at trial, made no effort to attack, or object to the garage. When later asking for clarification of the order to ‘remove the ADU’, the defendant was chastised and penalized for NOT defending the garage at trial. The Board now refuses to allow the garage to remain (Ms. Gilbert has the support of nearly half of the community) because, “we can’t change a Court Order”. Nearly everyone knows that mutual agreement of the parties will satisfy the Court.

This whole matter, in my opinion, is more a vindictive power play and word manipulation and far less a matter of an innovative structure built by a homeowner trying to improve her property. Might I ask, who’s playing golf with whom?

B. Bunker
Bonanza, CO

I was a very reluctant entrant to the Pilates practice, but given the nature of my injuries, the result of seventeen years of burro racing, I knew I needed to strengthen myself for surgery.  Over a year ago, I made my first appointment with Steve O’Neill at The Pilates Studio and, now, realize how important that phone call was. The work I did at The Pilates Studio allowed me to be physically and mentally prepared to enter surgery; but as important, it was the post-surgery work I have done there, in conjunction with professional physical therapy, that has allowed me to make incredible advances much more quickly than I or anyone anticipated.

Only with the combined care of Dr. Hunter; our superb hospital; professional physical therapy and the Pilates Studio am I confident of a full recovery.

Kate Larkin

If registered patients can’t get their medicine from a licensed MMJ Center then the street becomes a viable option. Banning centers or over-regulating the industry is not going to make marijuana go away. Marijuana is here to stay whether a few close minded people like it or not. It is a constitutional right that was voted for approval by a 60-40 margin in the county and the state. Trying to regulate the industry through zoning laws will only create lawsuits that will benefit no one except the attorneys. We need people with fresh ideas, a local government that is more concerned with educating our community about the benefits of these businesses than blatant attacks using unfounded nonsense.

It seems to me that the state has already over regulated the industry to the point of being potentially sued by every patient and Center owner in the state. The regulations that are currently trying to be enforced are a violation of constitutional law and are certainly going to cost state and local governments millions of dollars in litigation over the next few years. Does Salida have some hidden fund that can absorb a few multi-million dollar lawsuits?

Oh yes, I have heard the argument that this is not really a medicine and that all I have to do is cut my finger and I can get a card. I have also read other posts and editorials condemning marijuana as unsafe and the cause of schizophrenia and other hog-wash that supposed credible people have written. I have personally used marijuana as a medicine for over 40 years. It cured me of asthma when I was 14 years old. Marijuana cured me of anxiety, nervous disorders and depression before I was 16 years old. And yes, my parents knew about my use and supported it because the doctors could not help me other than prescribing me narcotics and anti-depressants that made me worse.

If you have internet access just do a search on Google for “Cannabis and Brain Cancer” or “Cannabis and Breast Cancer” or “Cannabis and ???” and you will see thousands of documents relating to the benefits of Cannabis. You can also go to www.drugwarfacts.org and get some truth on the subject.

I have lived a full and complete life graduating in 1973 with a 3.7 GPA, playing in varsity sports, going on to receive an associate degree in psychology and sociology. I am not mentally challenged, violent, a criminal or schizophrenic. I am physically challenged and marijuana gives me a better quality of life. I live in your community. I support local businesses that I spend a good deal of money at. I am your neighbor. I am the guy you’re sitting next to in church, the restaurant, or standing in line at Wal-Mart. I might even be working as a state, county or city employee. You just never know. However, I can tell you that I have been involved in this industry for 40 years and growing my own for 30 of those.

And yes, I did have more than a cut finger to get my card.

Personally I had to see a licensed doctor and take at least 3 years of medical records with me in order to receive a recommendation from the doctor to use medical marijuana as a pain reliever for my chronic back and neck pain associated with Spinal Stenosis. This disease left me partially paralyzed on my right side. Initially I was totally paralyzed on the right side including a drooping face and speech impediment. My left side was left in tremors and spasms of my arm and leg muscles. I spent 18 months after surgery on heavy narcotics and pain medication that almost killed me by shutting down my kidney and liver functions. During this painful time in my life, I had turned my back on the very medicine that had helped me in my younger life because I did not have access to it, other than buy it from the many local street dealers in your community.

Today, I am living virtually pain free. I have gained most of my right side back. I walk normal and am able to use my right arm. I have never asked for disability or help from the government. I only use marijuana at night when I am in pain to help me sleep after a hard day at work.

Is marijuana the cure? It is for me.

Does our City Council realize that they are helping the illegal production of cannabis and driving it closer and closer to our children in this community with their blatant attack on state licensed businesses that are already regulated beyond any other business on the planet? Seriously, do you really believe the government hype and BS associated with the propaganda of “Reefer Madness”? As for the fundamental religious view on this matter, read Genesis. God made ALL seed and saw that it was good. Enough said.

The close mindedness that is so evident in the minds of a few will be the cause of the underground market flourishing in this community. And your children will still have access to it, and much easier access at that. Right now these MMJ Centers are driving the underground market out of our community. They are putting a big dent in the black market. Remember, I have been involved in this industry for over 40 years right here in our community. And yes, I just might be the guy who sold it to your kids. I am not proud of that but I have been waiting for the government to quit lying to all of us for over 40 years. I don’t expect they will “come clean” anytime soon. And come on now, if most of you are honest you will admit that you been smoking in the closet for almost as long as I have.

Do good people like Colleen Kunkel and Kathy McQuillan, owners of Tenderfoot Health Collective, really look like “drug dealers” and “pot heads” to you? Or, are these kind generous women with a true heart and passion for their patients, on the front lines of helping the sick and suffering get the medicine that a licensed doctor recommended. I guess for a patient of theirs like I am it would be better for me to just drink alcohol and do hard narcotics and pain killers so that my 4 children and 3 grandchildren can watch a family member kill himself through abuse of these known agents of harm. Maybe I should be on “Hillbilly Heroin” (oxycodone) to ease my pain and suffering like our city council prescribes to.

Bull-cocky, I will not cave in to government propaganda. I will fight to my death to resolve this issue for the rights of the patients and the Centers that serve them and I will live to see the full legalization of this much needed medicine that I would much rather see my children use than alcohol or tobacco. Alcohol alone kills more than 100,000 people a year in this country. I don’t believe that marijuana by itself has ever killed one person.

If you need documented proof or facts go to: www.drugwarfacts.org

Others may say that association does not mean causation, and that psychotic individuals may just be self-medicating their illness with marijuana, hence the association. To the contrary, association was the first inkling that something was going on with smoking and lung cancer, with obesity and heart disease, with lead paint in homes and learning disabilities in children, etc. etc., all of which are now well accepted epidemiological cause and effect relationships. In the case of marijuana and psychosis, an excellent prospective study was carried out by Cecile Henquet et al. (2005, BMJ) who studied over 2400 teens/young adults for 4 years. Those who were psychotic at study onset were no more likely to begin smoking marijuana than normal teens, whereas those who were normal, but began smoking marijuana during the course of the study were significantly more likely to become psychotic. Thus, the self-medication hypothesis did not prove true in that study.

Some maintain that the perceived rate of schizophrenia has not changed in this country when it should have changed given the prevalence of pot smoking from the 1960’s onward. The primary reason that this argument is weak is that the psychiatric epidemiology in this country was not good enough during the first part of the 20th century, and still is not great, so fine-tuned tracking of such trends simply did not occur. If everyone in this country had smoked pot, the rate of schizophrenia should have doubled in the latter part of the 20th century. The best estimates are on the order of 20 to 30% at most were pot smokers on any regular basis in the sixties and seventies. A 1.2 to 1.3-fold increase requires really good epidemiology to pick up in retrospective analyses. The Swiss have done it, and found that a significant increase in schizophrenia did indeed accompany the significant increase in pot-smoking by their youth during the late 20th and into the early 21st century (Ajdacic-Gross V, et al., 2007, Schizophr Res).

Since medical marijuana has become more prevalent, surveys have found that teen usage is up, representing a reversal in a downward trend over the past couple decades. Teens are most at risk for the longterm psychiatric effects. The increased risk can be detected after 5 times of use, but is definitely worse in heavy users. Unlike cigarette smoking and social alcohol consumption, for which the health effects can be reversed if quit in time, the triggering of schizophrenia by marijuana can occur very early on and is not reversible. Those most at risk have a family history of mental illness (about 8% of us do).

Except for the scale, the commercial concerns of dispensaries are not unlike the concerns of the purveyors of tobacco (Philip Morris and the like). Salida should do what is best for the health of its citizens, and I would bet that the modest medical benefit missed by the few who have true medical need pales in comparison to the toll that ready availability exacts on youth. If the Salida Citizen would like to post pdf copies of any references cited above, I would be happy to provide them as they cost if obtained online.

Christine Miller, PhD

A decision on Over The River is expected from the BLM this spring when they release the Final Environmental Impact Statement. In the meantime, we have a few updates for you:

Action 22 Endorses Over The River

We are very pleased to announce that Action 22 has formally endorsed Over The River. Action 22 is the largest regional advocacy organization for southern Colorado and represents 22 counties. The current chair of the board is Mike Bandera, Vice President and General Manager of the Royal Gorge Bridge and Park, who has also expressed his support of Over The River individually. Christo thanks Action 22 for their support!

Watch Christo Describe Over The River

Renowned filmmaker Antonio Ferrera, who directed The Gates documentary, has produced a series of short videos that feature Christo speaking eloquently about his plans and artistic vision for Over The River. You can view the videos on our website, or become a fan on our Facebook page where all the clips are posted.

Westword Reviews Over The River Exhibition

Westword art critic Michael Paglia wrote an excellent article last month about Over The River and the current exhibition on display at the Museum of Contemporary Art (MCA) Denver. He describes the exhibition at MCA Denver as “beautiful and coolly elegant.” The Over The River exhibit includes several collages, drawings, maps, photos and materials that chronicle the development of the project since Christo and Jeanne-Claude first proposed it 17 years ago. The exhibition will be at MCA Denver through January 19, 2011.

Thanks again for supporting Over The River. We wish you a safe and happy holiday season and all the best in the New Year ahead!

Sincerely,
The OTR Team and Friends of Over The River

………………………

Over The River is a two-week temporary work of art by artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude. For more information, visit our website at www.OverTheRiverInfo.com.

Dear Family and Friends,

I’ve volunteered at Conour Animal Shelter which is located 100 miles south of where I live in Salida, Colorado. Compared to the shelter I work at, the dogs at Conour shelter are in dire need. My hope is that together we can raise the funds to ensure that dogs in their care will no longer sleep night after night outdoors in freezing temperatures.

My goal is to raise the funds for this project by December 15, 2010 so that every Conour shelter dog will have a heated dog house by Christmas.

Conour Animal Shelter, in Monte Vista, Colorado, operated by Upper Rio Grande Animal Society, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, provides for no-kill sheltering of 500 homeless dogs each year. In addition to indoor kennels, they have nine outdoor kennels used to house dogs for adoption. Colorado wind-chill and temperatures can be brutally cold. Their outdoor kennels have old dog houses that do not provide sufficient warmth to the dogs through the winter.

Ellie, is one of nine dogs living in an outdoor kennel at Conour Animal Shelter in Monte Vista, Colorado

If successful, the Warm Dog Project will provide a durable, well-insulated, heated dog house for each of the nine outdoor kennels at the Conour Animal Shelter by Christmas 2010.

• Dog Palace Dog Houses with Heating Pads $250 x 9 = $2,250
• Installation of Outdoor Electrical Conduit & Outlets for Each Kennel $89 x 9 = $800

Total Cost of The Warm Dog Project: $3,050

• A $50 donation will purchase a heating pad
• A $100 donation will purchase an electrical outlet for a kennel
• A $200 donation will purchase an insulated dog house
• A $350 donation will equip one kennel with a heated dog house and electrical outlet

Any amount donated will be greatly appreciated. If you’re able to donate, please email me the amount so that I can track how close we are getting to our goal. My email address is ambersalida@yahoo.com.
Please make checks payable to Upper Rio Grande Animal Society (with check Memo: The Warm Dog Project) and mail checks to Conour Animal Shelter, P.O. Box 369, Monte Vista, Colorado 81144 or Donate by credit card online at www.conouranimalshelter.com and email the Treasurer, Colette Skeff, at clod1051@gmail.com to let her know that your donation is for the Warm Dog Project.

Wishing you a warm and joyous holiday!

Love,

Amber van Leuken

December 21, 2010

Hello Friends & Family,

Amber van Leuken

The Chaffee County Republican Central Committee sent the following letter to the Chaffee County Commissioners advocating posting information on the county website to increase openness and accountability.

The draft 2011 Chaffee County budget was made available on the county website and, hopefully, the other recommendations will be considered and implemented.

Thanks.

Larry Kier, CCRCC Secretary
Buena Vista

———————–

June 16, 2010

Dear Chaffee County Commissioners:

In the interest of promoting an open and accountable government the Chaffee County Republican Central Committee encourages the Chaffee County Commissioners to make information related to expenditures of public funds and government activities readily available and accessible to the residents of Chaffee County.

Most documents with such information are currently in electronic format or can be easily converted to an electronic format.  One convenient and inexpensive means to make these documents available is posting them on the county website.   Providing reference copies at the public libraries should also be considered.

We please request that the following specific information be made available in electronic form on the county website:

1. Proposed and adopted county budget documents should be posted on the county website as soon as these documents are available.   The past practice has apparently been to have a printed copy of the draft budget documents available for public inspection or copying at the county courthouse.   This doesn’t provide easy or inexpensive access to the public.   In 2009, an electronic copy of the draft 2010 budget was posted on the county website but this was only done just prior to budget approval which doesn’t allow the public reasonable time or means to examine and comment on the proposed budget.   It does clearly demonstrate that budget documents can be posted on the county website.
2. Minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meetings should be posted on the county website with minimal delay.   Other nearby counties that post their Commissioners’ meeting minutes on their county website include Fremont, Alamosa, Gilpin, Gunnison, Saguache, Garfield, Elbert, Park and Custer.
3. Monthly county expenditures should be posted in electronic format when they are approved.  Currently, these expenditures are published in a single edition of the newspaper.  The publication is a legal announcement in the classified section of the paper.  It can be difficult to locate these announcements and also difficult to read the “fine print” format.   This information should be made available to the public as archived electronic documents on the county website.
4. Reports for any studies or consulting projects involving significant expenditures of public funds should be required in electronic format as part of the deliverables for each study or project.  These reports should be promptly posted on the county website or website links to available electronic copies of the reports should be posted on the county website.  Additionally, printed copies of the reports should be made available in the county’s public libraries.   Making reports for these studies or projects readily available to the public would demonstrate the public value received for the expenditure of public funds and also help to enhance opportunities for constructive actions resulting from the study or project.  The only exceptions should be for reports of legitimately confidential materials.

We urge the County Commissioners to please consider taking measures to implement these suggestions as soon as possible.

Thanks for your service to Chaffee County.

The engineering, the route, the technicalities, the scenery, the rocks, the trees, the sand. All perfect (if not a bit challenging on a rigid single speed). It just keeps going and going and going. I just kept grinning and grinning and grinning.

Thanks, thanks thanks!