Saturday, November 16, 2002
Healthy to ask questions
I disagree with the ViewPoints expressed on Wednesday regarding the conflict in the schools. The issue between John DeVincentis and Cyndy Simms is certainly the catalyst that started the conflict, but this issue has made people look deeper into how the school system runs. What they are finding is scary. Elected officials, under even the most rudimentary aspects of a democracy, are expected to respond to their constituents. In our district, they have transferred all their authority to an unelected official, the superintendent. Listen to the middle school and high school teachers at the Oct. 17 meeting who spoke about retaliation, lack of appreciation, lack of trust and lack of empowerment. Are these not issues in which we as a community should be concerned with? It is healthy to have the community questioning the board. It is healthy for the community to be involved in the schools in any capacity, whether formal or informal. In my view, the best thing that has happened to this district is that parents are now involved. I believe it will be a long time before a school board member runs unopposed. This creates dialogue and debate. This also creates better schools and better results for our kids.
Children are suffering
After nine years in the Steamboat school system, I can honestly say that this year my children are suffering. Why aren't we getting on with what is important teaching our children?
Change is good
A good CEO knows when to come into a company and a good CEO knows when to leave. Superintendent Cyndy Simms is no longer effective. Change is good.
Rethink courthouse plan
Yes. I think it's time that they rethink the courthouse plan. It would make more sense to build a judicial facility out near the jail and keep all felons on that end of town, and use the courthouse downtown for all other county business. As for the $11,000 that they spent to educate the public, it would have been better spent to educate themselves. I think it's time that we had some new blood in the commissioners' chairs. What do you say people?
Yes, you should move the courthouse west of town. I think the voters said that in the election. I'm surprised the person who wrote the front-page article doesn't read their own editorials. West of town is where it should be, and we don't need a parking ramp downtown.
I was for the courthouse, but I think it would be better to have it down by the Sheriff's Office.
Yes. I think the courts should be west of town near the jail. The proponents of a new courthouse say it's too risky having prisoners walking past jurors, witnesses, lawyers, etc. If the courts were near the jail, transporting prisoners would not be a problem. Also, parking is needed. Well there is plenty of parking space by the jail. There is also the argument that we should keep business downtown. Well, keep the county business in the current courthouse and move the courts out by the jail. Furthermore, a public building should be utilitarian and functional, not an architect's dream.
Yes, I am in favor of another judicial building, but I think it should be west of town where there is more land.
I would think the plan to move the courthouse west of town is a good idea. I don't think a parking garage belongs in the middle of our nice downtown area. I think maybe we could save money and have a shuttle service run people downtown, and that would clean up the congestion downtown. We already have our police facilities west of town and that's who is using the courts, so why not move the courthouse that direction?
No. I'm opposed to building a new courthouse out by the jail. I think we ought to build something in the location it was designed for that the community can be proud of instead of some doublewide looking thing out by the jail. If you don't believe me, go to Montrose and look at what they have built calling it their courthouse and compare it to the old courthouse downtown, a fine-looking structure. Build a parking lot somewhere else and let the chamber pay for it, but don't put it in the courthouse plan.
I think the courthouse needs to be left where it is. It's the anchor of the community. Moving it west of town would ultimately cause the downtown to lose its identity. Leave the courthouse where it is.
A threat from the judge?
Judge Garrecht's comments in Sunday's front-page article sounded like a threat for the citizens of Routt County to build him a new office. I guess he figures he can make those demands since he just received enough votes for retention. I guess he can also demand how Routt County citizens spend their wages. This is one Routt County citizen who will remember next election.
Stuffed ballot box?
Your "Best of the 'Boat" section was pretty entertaining, but isn't it a little bit obvious that at least a restaurant stuffed the ballot box? I guess it gets a little less entertaining when the same company wins everything.
Kathy: Time to go
I submit it is time for Kathy Connell to resign from City Council. It is not the public who needs education, it is she who needs education. She ought to learn the public does not want 3-2-1, the DDA and the public does not want 2C, water consolidation.
It seems our City Council president is upset because John Ross is filing a complaint. She says she is concerned about her integrity. What I want to know is why did she try to sneak through that water consolidation agreement in August? That made us all wonder what was going on behind the scenes.
Public is informed
I would like to respond to Kathy Connell's Sunday article. I resent the fact that she considers the voting public simple and that she thinks she needs to dumb down questions so that people can understand them. I think the people in this valley are highly educated and took the time to research the issues and made informed decisions. That is why the issues the city wanted did not pass. People were informed. They did not vote ignorantly.