Editor, 235 S. Nevada Ave., CS, CO 80903 • email: firstname.lastname@example.org
If your comments are mailed or emailed to us, we'll consider them for publication — unless you request otherwise.
Please include your name, city of residence and a daytime phone number for verification.
Candor and integrity
There is a general belief in this country that politicians lack a moral compass and conviction, and are constantly pandering for the next vote. There is a reason people have this perspective — it is the truth in a lot of cases.
Party membership and partisan decision-making are quite often driven by the desire to be elected or re-elected. It is easy to jump on the conservative or liberal bandwagon and make extreme statements when your audience is hugely conservative or liberal. It is much more difficult to stand up for your beliefs in a crowd that strongly disagrees with you.
There are those who have committed themselves to recalling Sen. John Morse. Evidently, they do not agree with his position on gun control. Morse was elected not once, but twice in a district that has a roughly equal number of Republicans, Democrats and Independents. Furthermore, he did not break the law or violate any ethical standards. Sen. Morse is only guilty of following his moral compass and convictions.
The irony is that for the most part we do not trust our political leaders, but when presented with a person who bases his decisions on his value system and not the next election or office, he is threatened with a recall.
Do not punish candor and moral integrity with threats of a recall. By doing this you are encouraging our political leaders to be dishonest with themselves and their electorate.
— Ken Barela
The recalls, pushed by those opposing laws against high-capacity magazines and against comprehensive background checks, promote the distribution of weapons of mass murder to those who clearly shouldn't have them.
Some say this is about "freedom." Sure, the insane "freedom" to have the ability to easily commit mass murder. What could possibly go wrong? Vote for sanity, vote no on the recalls.
— Bob Powell
Sitting this one out
I am a lifetime Democratic voter. I think the recall against John Morse is wrong, in specific and in principle. But will I make time to actually go and vote for him to keep his job? Probably not.
If it was a mail ballot, would I spend a postage stamp to help him keep his job? Doubt it.
It's one thing to vote for a guy like John Morse as the lesser of two evils, when I am already voting anyway.
I called Morse's office several times over the last several years regarding snafus I had with state government. I remember learning in high school that one of the functions of elected representatives was to investigate, and possibly straighten out, these kinds of problems. I left a lot of messages, but nobody ever called me back.
I found myself thinking, is he waiting for me to send a check before he looks into it? Finally I quit calling. Would John Morse go out of his way to try and save my job? If the answer to that seems to be no, why should I do it for him?
I regret that the system is being abused in this manner. I'm angry about the money being spent on the election. I support reasonable limits on gun possession and ownership. But not enough to get me out to vote for a guy who ignored my requests for assistance in times of need. That is the lesson that the Ruling Class needs to take from this election. The wealthy few and the corporations can get you elected, but if the electorate thinks you don't care about them, any recall attempt will sink you.
— Gina Douglas
A right to be heard
I've read with dismay some letters printed in the Indy during the last month, particularly Tracey Wright and Pat Hill's pieces ("Waste of money," "Thank you, John," Aug. 21). The gist of many of these is twofold: that because John Morse was duly elected by his constituents, no recall effort should be made (particularly because the senator is term limited in a year anyway); and the Republican Party (generally opposed to wasteful spending) should not be wasting taxpayers' money on this election.
I understand the sentiment (being a penny-pincher myself), but there are, in fact, some very good reasons for this recall election.
Our republic is built on the idea that dialogue is a necessary and critical part of the process. Without dialogue we lose the inherent brilliance of the voting public who, by the way, showed up en masse (in the many hundreds) to discuss the gun laws in question. These people, much like myself, wanted to address the problems we felt were inherent in some of the legislation.
John Morse deserves to be recalled because he changed the rules of testimony when these bills were to be discussed. He knew that should each of these bills be vetted properly, they would not withstand the rational gaze of the populace, and therefore, would sway his slim majority. He was not interested in debate, nor in education, nor in fairness.
Please, don't get me wrong. Like Pat Hill, I like some of what Morse has done this year. That does not, however, mitigate his culpability in crushing debate over these gun laws.
— Joe Uveges
Let the petitioners pay
What's wrong with this picture? Bernie Herpin, a candidate for the state Legislature in the same district where he was not re-elected to serve on the City Council.
If the people didn't want him on City Council, why would we vote to send him to Denver to serve as a state senator in District 11?
Vote no on the recall and maintain our present state senator.
A way to pay for the recall would be to have the people who signed the recall petition each donate equal amounts of money. That way my tax dollars could be used for important issues facing our community.
When they can show me where in the Second Amendment it says anything about bullet capacity being more than 15 per clip, I will vote for the recall. But I don't see that happening!
— Leonard Lemesany
A better OCC plan
"Beware, west-siders" indeed. Dave Hughes, the savior of Old Colorado City, in a fit of irony is now supporting its degradation ("Pro Kum & Go," Letters, Aug. 28).
Please, Dave, you "find most all of the objections to it groundless"? Many of us do not share your idea that residential values, neighborhood quality, and historic heritage are groundless, even in comparison to financial gain, most of which will go out of state. There has been enough in the media lately to support how the majority of the neighbors to the proposed gas station feel.
"The worst outcome would be Goodwill effectively abandoning it to the elements ..." No, Dave, the worst possible outcome would be a city block covered with a 24/7, 10-pump gas station that could just as well be built a half-mile away.
It appears that you missed the Westside Pioneer's Aug. 15 article documenting the proposal by Joe Rexroad and a group of local investors for a plaza that would be a wonderful alternative to the mega gas station. The plaza option may now be viable since Goodwill changed its mind about selling its property as one unit.
Please reconsider how supporting a non-invasive alternative to gas will build on your (and our) legacy.
— Bruce Hamilton
Brats in the 'hood
Well, it sure didn't take the new crop of CC students long to make an impression on the residents of the Old North End.
Once again, we are surrounded by barbarians that have no manners and no idea how to live peacefully with other human beings in a close environment. Sunday evening, we were bombarded by students partying in the streets, alleys, yards and porches as if this were Bourbon Street at Mardi Gras.
Every semester, every year, this kind of behavior ruins the neighborhood. Just when you get one group of out-of-control students to finally quiet down (begrudgingly, only after dozens of police calls and warnings), the slumlord property owners bring in a new group of students and the cycle starts all over again.
It seems to me as if the Old North End Neighborhood's long-standing policy on neighbor-to-CC student relations is not working:
1) Try and reach out to your neighbors. Get to know who's living next to and around you, exchange contact information if possible.
2) If you confirm they are CC students, and can't come to a neighborly agreement on noise, parties, parking, etc., then call the CC staff to help resolve any issues and complaints.
3) Call CSPD if the first two steps have failed.
4) File a complaint with CSPD on tenants and landlords and neighbors who habitually violate codes and zoning laws.
Yes, I followed these steps ... but every year? That's ridiculous.
So this time, I'm forwarding this email to the mayor's office, City Council, the city planner and CSPD, as well as the Independent, the Gazette and local television news channels to demand a "Call for Action" from CC to put an end to this behavior.
— Tommy Pesavento