Editor’s note: A letter in this article has been updated to clarify the ownership situation of the Boulder Municipal Airport.
Do we want to preserve the privilege of the few?
Recently, PBS presented an hour-long documentary about the successful enterprise of the town and county of Telluride to preserve their lands in the way they saw fit.
Developers were at large in the usual story of profiteering. Basically, the local government declared the right of eminent domain declaring the right of local government to “condemn” the magnificent valley to remain a natural inspiring experience in perpetuity.
The developers wanted just 10% to be McMansions … was that too much to ask? The locals wanted a greater good for the magnificent purity of the valley, while the developers wanted to get the money, however possible.
The court said the local government did have the right of eminent domain … but they had to come up with a reasonable amount to buy the property, which was way too much for the locals to raise.
In the end, through locals putting second mortgages on their houses, and bake sales, etc., they came up with nearly enough. But in the end, the really rich guys who had attained fortunes in the community had to step up to save the pristine valley.
Regarding the Boulder airport: The issue is very similar. Do we want to preserve the privilege of the few?
By the way, I love flight and planes and freedom, but I also like zoning laws … somehow it’s not right that my next-door neighbor can open up a gas station or a mini motorbike facility, etc.
Times change, Boulder Junction at 30th and Pearl used to be the Rodeo arena. I don’t remember people saying it should therefore remain that way forever. We need to give up the airport maintained for the privileged few … regardless of their “trickle-down” idea that it is helping us.
Michael Dille, Boulder
CU is a far better place with DiStefano’s retirement
I have seen much praise lately around Phil DiStefano and what he has done at CU. Things a CU were not all good under his leadership. As a retired 30-year CU employee, we often referred to him as Teflon Phil for his ability to avoid accountability. When BIG embarrassing mistakes were made at CU he somehow avoided termination. Examples:
• An on-campus alcohol-related issue in 1998.
• A huge football scandal that caused a CU President, an Athletic Director and Head Coach all to leave CU.
• When some CU faculty demanded more equity, Phil mishandled the matter.
• Phil attempted to take control of student-governed funds for other uses.
But, please feel free to research this online for yourself. Trust me, CU is a far better place with Phil’s retirement.
Bob Yinzer, Boulder
Boulder legislates and designs against cars
As a longtime Boulder resident, I have a lot of experience as a pedestrian dodging bicycles. Whoever redesigns Iris and other Boulder streets and sidewalks should make sure not to have bicycles and pedestrians share any paths because it puts pedestrians in danger. When a car hits a bicycle, it makes the news and of course raises legitimate concerns, but when a bicycle hits a pedestrian, it does not make the news unless someone is seriously injured or killed. On a Boulder sidewalk, on many hiking trails and on the CU campus where the dismount signs are so often ignored, taking a walk means regularly looking back to see whether a bike is bearing down on you and always being ready to get out of the way. Cars go on streets, pedestrians go on sidewalks, but bikes go on streets, sidewalks and bike paths. This is a cyclists’ town, and it protects cyclists, legislates and designs against cars, and too often takes pedestrian safety for granted. Many in the current generation of Boulder cyclists swoop around pedestrians without giving the verbal warnings that used to be common on hiking trails, like “on your right,” and without slowing down. When cyclists and the city say, “It’s my way or the highway,” I take the highway and drive, because it’s safer than being a pedestrian.
Bruce Kawin, Boulder
