Best of the Web: Helmet use
January 17, 2010
For you … who believe that you're bullet proof on the slopes, liken skiing to driving. You are a careful skier and driver. You would never have an accident because you are such a careful driver. Then abracadabra! One day, somebody makes a left turn in front of your car or a drunk is going the wrong way and hits you. Are you wearing your seat belt? If you do, it will lessen the injuries. If you are a careful skier, the same thing can happen. Somebody hits an ice slick on Tornado Lane and takes you out. A boarder turns into you on Pony. The concern may not be you, the concern are the other folks on the hill. The science and medicine proves the point — helmets save lives.
Car registration fees
■ I still don't understand why this is being repealed! Pay on time or pay the price.
Why give up a funding source of:
"At the end of 2009, that meant an additional $201,804 for things such as maintaining county roads and clearing snow."
With a total Road and Bridge budget of $10.9 million for 2010, the county is about $500,000 behind on funding for infrastructure projects such as replacing roads and bridges, exactly the kind of initiatives FASTER fee increases were meant to fund.
Seems to me that having a funding source that provides nearly half of the budget shortfall is a good thing, especially when it encourages people to pay what they owe on time. …
I'm sorry but I like the near $200,000 in revenue the county has collected for transportation from FASTER, and think that Mr. White should rethink his plan to remove this revenue source. Even if the fees went down 75 percent as White estimates, we still could receive nearly $50,000, for transportation, not much in the road building world, but it would pay the salary for a plow driver and provide some revenue for our cash strapped counties. …
Monger says: "A deterrent to driving safe vehicles and an incentive to not get a license. I would rather entice people to be legal."
Are we going to repeal speeding penalties and start to reward those that don't get caught speeding?
I would entice people to be legal by giving them a reason to pay on time, late fees!
If this bill is too hard on ag users or others that need many registered vehicles to do their work, let's get a exemption for those users rather than taking away the only enticement for paying on time.
■ The late fees on an inexpensive vehicle could easily represent a 100 percent penalty for being late.
If that is fair then change the fee amount from $25 dollars to 25 percent per month. That will give equal incentive to all to avoid late registrations.
■ Let's hope the voters in Steamboat are not as short-sighted as those in Eagle. For anyone who has lived here for more than 20 years (the expected time line for Steamboat 700 development to be fully realized), the growth in Steamboat is obvious. Are we to expect that because traffic has increased during these past two decades, we should bar the door, put a gate over Rabbit Ears and keep newcomers out?
The proposal for Steamboat 700 supports planned growth. Of course the economy is down, but knee-jerk reactions won't help this community manage its future. I would like to hear how the opponents propose we manage growth for the next 20 years. So far, all I hear from that group is negativity, barely hiding the sentiment: "I've got mine, who cares about yours!" What are the counter proposals?
Growth will happen, make no mistake about that. It benefits everyone to make it intelligent growth, not haphazard.
■ I agree. We should trust our elected council members and city staff who have spent so much time thoroughly researching this annexation before they approved it. It is so important that we don't miss this opportunity for Steamboat's future. I don't want everyone to have to commute from "downvalley" to come in to this town and serve the second-home owners. We need to leave our community vibrant and full of local business people and families all day and week long, rather than shipping them back out to outlying communities at 5 p.m. each day. I agree on your comment about showing us how the opponents plan for the expected growth to be absorbed, perhaps they prefer for us to lose some of our ag land, and they prefer to see Strawberry Park, South Valley floor and Emerald mountain become developed. Perhaps they prefer to see haphazard growth where no developer has a vested interest in providing and paying for infrastructure. There are so many benefits to the WSSAP annexation that was already approved and is so heavily endorsed. I hope we can make it stick because it makes me sick to my stomach to think of all the opportunity we will lose if it goes away.