Lower speed limits on Evergreen Parkway
Editor:
Re: Group hopes to find solutions to wildlife-vehicle collisions in the Jan. 29 Canyon Courier
Reduced and heavily enforced speed limits are the only practical solution to the ongoing problem of vehicle-wildlife collisions in Evergreen. We could pay for decent roads in Evergreen with the fines and maybe eventually a wildlife bridge/tunnel.
People, self-absorbed and distracted, are always the problem, but nobody looks in the mirror. It’s always somebody else’s fault. We can’t turn left off Evergreen Parkway, except on a green arrow, even though you can see for miles because some idiot several years ago dropped her cell phone on the floor of her SUV and killed somebody.
The speed limit on ALL of Evergreen Parkway (Autobahn?) should be 45 mph or
less from Interstate 70 to Evergreen Lake, and lower at night and in inclement weather — no exceptions. Where does CDOT post the highest speed limit (55)? Of course, on the hill next to Elk Meadow, you know, where the elk and deer cross.
Same on Route 6 in Golden, it’s 55 mph where the designated wildlife crossing is posted, lower elsewhere. Go figure!! If you need to drive faster than that, as our Commander in Calamity says, go back to where you came from — you don’t belong here!
Street lighting will only displace the crossing as wildlife nearly always avoid lighted areas at night. Besides, most of us in Evergreen (I’ve been here 25 years) prefer seeing the stars at night and rarely use outdoor lighting. Our dark skies are an asset that are greatly appreciated. Lighting next to Elk Meadow is a non-starter, a whack-a-mole solution, at best.
A real wildlife bridge/tunnel would be great but must wait for the funds from the traffic fines to build up before it is economically viable. They do work, though, according to a recent article in High Country News (Jan 1, 2020). Alternately, they could tear up the four-lane portion of Highway 74 and make it two lanes again, which might discourage enough speeders to leave Evergreen that there would be no interest in four lanes or 50-55 mph speed limits.
Of course, the real problem is TDMP (too damn many people) and the fact that
growth never pays for itself. Heck, voters just authorized a new vice (sports betting) so it could be taxed to pay for more growth. Humans are the least natural species on the planet and the cause of all its problems. In the meantime, lower the speed limits and pay attention.
Greg Scott
Evergreen
Gardner needs to do his job
Editor:
I have been an independent voter most of my life, too disappointed in both parties to belong to either. Over my life, my voting record has been fairly evenly split, supporting the person I believed would do the best job.
I voted for Sen. Gardner. He was the last Republican I voted for, and right now I would bet that I will never vote for another. The senator’s party has reached a level of greed, apathy and corruption that I did not think possible.
They must vote for witnesses and vote guilty, but Gardner voted “no” on witnesses.He has chosen to be a spineless, bootlicking toady since the instant he was sworn in.
But I still find it impossible to believe that 51 people are willing to destroy our democracy in order to preserve their own power and further their greed and avarice. The stakes are far higher than their own personal futures.
I suggest the senator get a job like the rest of us. If he does the right thing, he might survive politically. If he doesn’t, he is doomed in Colorado.
I hope Sen. Gardner stands up for what my ancestors fought and died for. I hope he will be the representative we elected him to be.
Debra West
Conifer
Bloomberg is worth a look
Editor:
As the presidential primary ballots will be going out soon, I urge you to consider Mike Bloomberg. I have been listening to interviews with him and after watching all the debates, I believe he is the very best candidate who can beat Trump.
I went to his Denver office opening on Saturday. He was literate, comfortable, kind, compassionate, humorous, a uniter and a leader. He also didn’t use fear to get people’s attention.
Rather he talked about his continuing support of causes such as uniting the country, better healthcare choices, protection of women’s rights, common-sense gun legislation, climate change and building our infrastructure. He has been spending his own money for years on these same causes. He is the complete opposite from our current president. As he said, he is the “Untrump.”
After his speech on Saturday, he stopped to have a conversation with a man in a wheel chair as opposed to making fun of him. Refreshing.
Also I do not agree with the criticism of his “buying the presidency,” which some candidates have leveled toward him. He is fortunate and smart enough to have created his own wealth, which he is spending on fighting the effects of the Trump presidency.
As it is his own money, he also does not owe any “favors” to any special interest group. He is very transparent about the causes he believes in and has been supporting already with his own money for years. Whether he is elected is up to the voters.
To win the presidency, the candidate must have broad appeal. Many independents and Republicans wish to get rid of Trump but do not support the current candidates.
Bloomberg is a pragmatist who wishes to unite and be a leader for all the country, not just a single party and wants to put the “us” back in the U.S. He did it in New York when he was elected only two months after 9/11.
He knows how to lead, delegate, surround himself with experts and get things done. The average life span of a New Yorker actually increased by three years due to the healthcare options which he brought to the city.
If you get a chance to hear him speak or watch him in an interview, please do it. I am hoping I saw our next president last Saturday. He is honestly a good human being worth your time and your vote.
Sandra Slonim
Evergreen
Where’s the outrage?
Editor:
In his letter in the Jan. 15 edition of the Courier, Gregory Dufford replayed the party line that President Trump abused his power. Perhaps he’s forgotten, or has chosen to ignore, the fact that the Ukranian president has openly and repeatedly stated that he did not feel pressured and that there was no quid pro quo.
Joe Biden, on the other hand, has gone on public video bragging about the quid pro quo that he used to get the prosecutor investigating the company on whose board his son sat fired. Where’s that outrage?
John Griggs
Evergreen
Gardner abandons Coloradans
Editor:
I attended one of Sen. Cory Gardner’s last town halls on Aug. 15, 2017. He didn’t have substantive answers then, and he’s been hiding ever since. His answer to health insurance concerns was that the ACA doesn’t work.
His “solution” has been to vote multiple times to repeal it, along with its pre-existing condition protections and Medicaid expansion. Worse, he has never offered any new ideas or a plan to replace it. He has done nothing to address rising prescription drug costs, probably because he takes money from Eli Lilly.
Even though the majority of Coloradans support universal background checks for gun purchases, he won’t do so at the federal level because the NRA has contributed over $2.7 million to his coffers.
Gardner claims he will fight for clean air and water, but he has voted consistently for rule changes that make it harder for the EPA to crack down on corporate polluters. He votes this way because he has taken over $1.5 million from oil and gas corporations and executives like Harold Hamm of Continental Resources Inc. (in Oklahoma), and Charles Koch of Koch Industries. Other billionaire donors include casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the US Chamber of Commerce and Goldman Sachs. I won’t bore you with all the millionaires. But it is notable that most of these high-dollar donors don’t even live in Colorado.
Colorado lost $8 million in construction funding for projects at Petersen AFB because Gardner wouldn’t stand up to Trump’s fake emergency border wall. On the other hand, Colorado now hosts the Space Force, which makes Gardner very proud. He has no ideas on addressing our crumbling bridges and dams, or protecting Dreamers, but thank God we have a Space Force.
He responded to my letter about impeachment saying, “No matter who occupies the office of the President, I will always hold the President and his or her administration to the highest standards.” Really? Standards? This statement comes from a man who recently accepted money from Trump fundraisers, and now sits as a juror for Trump’s impeachment trial. Does anybody else see a conflict of interest here?!
Janis Dufford
Evergreen