Jump to content
It is the act of trying to change Thanksgiving to serving healthy food that is so useless. it is like giving relationship advice to college kids in preparation of Spring Break. The advice completely misses the point of the event. No one wants someone bringing food to a Thanksgiving meal to say it is low fat, low sodium and low calorie. It is fine to bring a vegetable dish, but make sure that it is tasty.
I am fine with them after Thanksgiving giving advice on how to not allow leftovers, holiday parties and other events to cause seasonal weight gains.
Just like after Spring Break is the time to give relationship advice.
Useless people talk about healthy eating on Thanksgiving.
What useless people. Next we will be talking about healthier drinking on New Year's Eve.
Thanksgiving is one day. Anyone that worries about eating healthier on one day a year completely misses the point. Eat healthy every other day and eat what you want on Thanksgiving. If you like health food then maybe you'd like a salad.
But anyone seeking to convert the annual day of feast and thanks into a health food lesson completely misses the point.
"got to enter it together"
There appears to be no evidence that they would have wanted to die together. Pretty clear that she was leading an active life with all sorts of plans that didn't involve him.
Him with DUI issues and her with a garage and using his truck seems to me to likely have been a fair deal between friends than evidence of a deeper relationship.
The push for government to do something about affordable housing comes most strongly from local businesses that have trouble finding workers able to afford living here.
Note that SB's purchase of Iron Horse was never to provide affordable housing for SB residents, but for seasonal workers.
SB government is paying for marketing, subsidizing airline travel and asked to provide cheap housing. All to help local businesses get customers and to keep labor costs down. Locally, those needing to be needed and receiving government assistance are the businesses.
The reason behind organizations building affordable housing in SB is that with the donations, deal on the lot and volunteers then they can relatively easily end up building a duplex or such at less than market price.
The trouble they face when building where lots are generally available is that they could easily end up more expensive than private contractors. Note that Habitat's last project in SB ended up at a higher cost per a duplex unit that private builder was selling a new single family house in Hayden.
It can be more expensive to build with volunteers if you are paying for a general contractor to supervise. The GC can be there on days with only a couple of volunteers that are of minimal help. And you end up paying more for plumbers and electricians when not able to schedule their work well in advance and it becomes a short notice emergency job.
At Habitat's last project, I was told it was fairly common for the paid crew to start the week removing the work done by the weekend volunteers since walls built over the weekend were not located in the right spot (off by 6 inches or more) and so on. They also had major unexpected excavation costs due to sewer line issues. As described to me, they built the foundation and then discovered they didn't have enough slope to the sewer line in the street. So to maintain sufficient slope they had to run the line at an angle and joined the main all the way over in front of a neighbor's house. So they paid for one trench to the main in front that was used and then paid for a second trench at least twice as long. And ripped up a bunch of the asphalt that they had to repair.
And the sewer line issue was entirely predictable since the lots on that side of the street are obviously a few feet lower than the street. The existing houses had the same issue, but they fixed it by making sure the sewer line left the foundation at a sufficient height Somehow Habitat failed to notice it until it was too late.
Stagecoach and Oak Creek are at a minimum of 10 minutes closer to the mountain than Hayden. And very often more than that. It can take 20 minutes to get from Walton Creek Road to West SB. Nothing wrong with Hayden, but it is significantly further to the mountain area.
Highway 131 is not at all bad any more. The worse part for me was always the straight sections with no shoulders. it was downright scary being pretty sure you are at the edge with an oncoming vehicle driving down the middle. The canyon is just a matter of driving the speed limit during the winter. Those 30 mph turns cannot be driven at 40+ in the winter.
I am disappointed that the county's work on 14 didn't fix the areas with no shoulders and big drop offs. Would just seem to be a matter of dumping gravel and rock there.
Mass transit is nice, but it is used by a very small fraction of the local population If you live in SB then it can allow living without a car, but it isn't very practical when 20+ miles away with service limited to morning and evening rush hours The long haul routes are also expensive to operate and move relatively few people. The measure of efficiency is passengers per mile bus is driven. So the number is low when hauling people a longer distance.
A rural area really should not be making housing decisions based upon mass transit infrastructure. People will drive and when the costs become an issue then they will carpool.
Anyway, there are affordable housing opportunities regionally that are acceptable to thousands of people working in SB. It is an insult to them and the public in general to suggest that affordable housing must be located in SB.
I think the last project is what spelled the end for Habitat locally. The two units that ended up with Habitat asking for a purchase price and financing that the volunteer prospective owners couldn't or wouldn't meet. And from what I've heard from neighbors, that construction was a fiasco from day one. How else do you get some amount of donated materials and volunteered labor, but end up too expensive for the families?
Habitat owned a lot in Oak Creek that they sold recently. They didn't get that lot in order to move it to SB. Until their letter seeking to give a palatable explanation of their bankruptcy, they were willing to consider projects outside of SB.
Habitat constructed so little housing that it had no significant effect upon local affordable housing.
This editorial's lament of "long commutes" is woefully ignorant. A whole lot of people that work in SB currently live in Hayden, OC and Stagecoach. The time spent on those commutes is actually less than that of the average worker in most cities and it is hardly unacceptable.
If this paper were to scratch the surface then it would also discover there are quite a number of people that commute to SB from Craig. That is a tougher commute, but it seems that many of those like living in a larger community even if it means a longer commute.
Personally, I think Stagecoach is stuck in limbo with an incomplete water and sewer system. It lacks enough paying customers to build out the system and is thus in a self reinforcing cycle of not enough paying customers. It would seem that SB and Routt County affordable housing efforts could find a way (spend the money) to fix the infrastructure as part of a substantial effort to provide affordable lots ready for construction. They could forgive those costs if the property owner builds a truly affordable house targeted for AVERAGE income with some sort of deed restriction. It would seem possible to create hundreds of lots ready for affordable homes. Note that average income is significantly more than most local service jobs, but there is also limited housing supply available at that price range.
The one deed restriction that preserves it as an affordable unit and doesn't create counterproductive incentives is just to prevent additions so that a modest sized house must remain a modest sized house. Thus, the deed restrictions just serves to preserve the number of modest homes which is the affordable housing supply.
My condolences to friends and family of both victims. RIP
Why speculate on suicide or murder suicide when there is no evidence at this time of anything other than accidental carbon monoxide poisoning? Of course the coroner has to allow for the possibility of anything, but the paper using that quote fits the narrative the paper has been pushing from the start of this story. Since the coroner hasn't ruled anything out, technically the coroner is allowing for the possibility that she killed him and then committed suicide. Just saying in the environment of a lack of facts and the paper printing rampant speculation that the paper could have just as easily speculated that he was the victim.
The paper's reporting has been exceptionally biased. At every point it has speculated that Mark Schiebel is a suspect and mentioned only negative information about him. None of the previous articles described him as also being a missing person.
The search warrant of his condo was almost certainly issued on the basis on his missing a probation meeting and being a missing person and not because he was a suspect in this case. Paper had the option to mention that but instead decided to use a quote that no evidence was found related to this case.
This paper missed no opportunity to impugn him and print speculation suggesting he was guilty in her disappearance. Not once did the paper mention the possibility they went on a drive together in his truck and they might have had an accident even though the police never claimed to have found a crime scene.
There is no evidence of anything so any conclusions is pure speculation. Just as a counterpoint to the paper's assumptions, it is also possible that they went on a scenic drive, stopped for whatever reason and were inside with the engine running. And then a mechanical defect in the exhaust system allowed carbon monoxide inside the vehicle and they never realized it. Exhaust system could have a hole that isn't a problem when driving since the wind carries it away, but when parked it travels inside the vehicle.
Oh no, what is the bogeyman of the moment? Looks like they decided to combine butane processing with hash oil.
Using butane processing is like making your own alcohol distillery. A needless risk for something that is easy enough to purchase.
As for hash oil, it is like liquor to beer. Nothing different except for those that want to achieve maximum intoxication.
If Grand Futures were to focus on what medical studies and long term outcome studies have found for decades then their message would be anti-intoxication and particularly against alcohol intoxication. Heavy alcohol use as a teenager appears to wire the developing brain to seek intoxication of all types. Thus, teenage alcohol use is a predictor of significantly higher risk of later meth, cocaine and so on abuse.
There is certainly plenty of evidence that teenage drinking is a major issue. It is not as if teenage drinking is a "solved" problem and so next most important issue is teenage mj usage.
Marijuana is harmful to the developing brain as are many other things such as Ritalin.
But Grand Futures consistently treating mj as worse than alcohol suggests a political bias and an avoidance of facts.
Last login: Saturday, November 15, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.