Jump to content
Scott, the Update does ask my question, and you are right, there is a middle approach between the 2 extremes of emphasizing growth out West or emphasizing Infill. Here is the City page with a link to each of the 3 Alternatives.
I haven't a strong preference. But like Omar, I would like to see my community's preference being followed. If we have a community requesting dense infill, great. If we have a community requesting Western growth, great. Same for the middle option. But until we see that community preference made clear, Up-zoning our existing densities and building heights is uncalled for - existing owners bought into a given character and they should have a voice in changing that character.
The Update can guide both public and private investment. (Sorry Danny M. found that to be untrue with his unfortunate timing.) We'll need adequate infrastructure where we plan to grow. Re: the regional thing, I agree people will drive to suit their needs. You and I had that argument years ago. You win.
Thanks for the snowpack graph Michael, and the reminder. 2011 was so, so epic. We could step from the rafts right into the kitchen at Box Elder 1. Let it snow.
I'm disappointed by this thread. Why spend so much of your time describing how wrong and dumb everyone else is? It is an utterly false premise. Those who disagree with you are hopelessly inferior to you?
Political extremes are easy, and made easier with oversimplified views. As one with family property on the Gulf coast marginally affected by the BP spill, Joe's "you could sue BP" is a hopeless proposition. Similarly, the EPA can trace its formation to the fouled and even "dead" state of important U.S. rivers. We should go back to that?
If we do not improve our ability to work together, 100% of us will regret that we never managed to see ourselves as one.
In my opinion, the SB700 defeat was not a vote against wholesale growth, or proof of a flawed West Area Plan. There were a myriad of parameters for one's vote. Yes, huge scale of the annexation was one, but the economy was tanking, etc… We have little or no say in whether our growth is slow or booming. We only have some say about the density we can stand in a given neighborhood. Put differently, we can send growth to the West or squeeze it into the City limits.
But I agree wholeheartedly with Omar's sentiment, and his letter is important. Whatever style of growth we are going to embrace should have public endorsement. Too bad the Area Plan Update has gotten so little attention.
Mark, black and white stereotypes and labels exemplify the dumbing down of information, and thus the dumbing down of voters - something you routinely decry. If you want smarter voters, stop oversimplifying the issues to the level of your gut.
For instance, Mark Udall has been pushing back against the excesses of the Patriot Acts more than any elected official. He was vocal about the overreaching NSA powers years before his peers. I consider Udall to be the exception to D.C.'s corruption and influence. If you do not, at least acknowledge the positives beside the negatives when you argue to toss Udall out.
I agree with your frustration with corrupt politics and influence. But focusing so much on popular partisan conclusions is not going to change that central problem. Too often I think you accomplish the reverse - popular partisan talking points echoed by the existing elite and lobbyists, that divide us on vastly oversimplified hot-button items that are never resolved. We send our $$ to the same old D.C. endorsed lobbyists and end up reinforcing the status quo. You seem to accept the corruption is wide spread, but you only point at Democrats as the problem. I suppose I do the same in regard to policy, if not the politicians by name.
Effective argument against the elite should explore common ground at the grass roots where we agree, but cannot advance. What is your opinion of Citizens United? Gerrymandered congressional districts? How would you suggest we improve government?
Macs rule! Hang in there, Jae.
Our existing health insurance provider has been calling us 2 and 3 times a week. If the ACA was such a boon to my carrier, why is that carrier trying so hard to sell us his product that is not part of the new insurance exchange? Joe if you are right and the carriers control and love the ACA, why is my phone ringing?
Steamboat Springs goals and long-term strategic vision. On one hand yes, these are the collective goals of 7 City Councilors. But please also better attend the goals and strategies of the Steamboat Springs community. The Area Plan Update deserves more ink and mention than it saw in 2013. Well attended and popularly endorsed Community Plans are how your decisions avoid reactionary guessing and stay ahead of the curve. Thank you.
I went back through a decade of premiums we paid for our health insurance. The average annual increase in premiums over that period was 11% per year. The early payments covered a household of 4, while most covered a household of 2, so the inflation is actually a little higher. This June the premiums jumped 20%. The June before they jumped 19%. That trend is simply not sustainable. It would ruin us and many other families. Many businesses could not sustain that trend either.
That seems an obvious fact, and a problem worthy of national and state attention. There have to be better constraints on this inflation.
After surviving the Colorado websites, I am encouraged by my experience with Colorado's exchange. It offers across the board standardizations and far more shopper information than was available before. That clearer picture of the product makes for smarter buyers and should increase the competition between insurers.
Last login: Wednesday, March 5, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.