There’s one civil rights initiative

Recently, we obtained information from a concerned Grand Junction voter saying that signature collectors in your area are spreading misinformation about the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative, also known as Amendment 46, and the competing effort, Initiative 82. We think it is important for voters to know that these are paid signature collectors who will go to any length to collect signatures.
We believe it is time for the truth on affirmative action. Amendment 46 is a citizen-led effort that, if passed this November, would prohibit the government from giving preferential treatment or discriminating against any person in public contracting, public hiring and public education. Nothing more and nothing less.

Initiative 82 is a competing effort designed to mislead voters. By using similar language to our initiative, Initiative 82’s backers are trying to deceive voters into believing they are signing on to eliminate racial preference programs, which is in fact what Amendment 46 will do. Initiative 82 would maintain the status quo, allowing government to continue dividing us on the basis of our race and gender when we apply for jobs, for college or for government contracts. Such segregation is wrong and the time for change is now.
We are encouraging Grand Junction voters to get the facts before they sign. As the Monday deadline approaches for Initiative 82 supporters to submit more than 76,000 voter signatures to the Secretary of State, we are seeing their desperation manifest itself in the form of misinformation about our amendment and their own.

To get the facts before you sign, please visit www.Coloradocri.org. There is only one civil rights initiative approved for this November’s ballot and that is Amendment 46.

JESSICA PECK CORRY
KATE MELVIN
Colorado Civil Rights Initiative
Denver

Asphalt costs should slow Delta County road project

Has Delta County government completely lost touch with reality? Asphalt is now at $700 per ton and diesel fuel at nearly $5 per gallon. It would be my guess that the county will have a very difficult time doing even the normal maintenance on our roads.
But that has not stopped Commissioner Wolf from charging full speed ahead with the Cedar Mesa Grade project. It seems the latest crises is that the C is going to slide off the hill!

Common sense would suggest that rebar on the C and guard rails on the road would solve the problem. However, if Mr. Wolf manages to push through his agenda, let’s do this job right on the C with a cement foundation. While we’re at it, let’s order some nice marble to make it really classy.

BOB KAPUS
Cedaredge

City to charge residents for using credit cards

So the city now will charge utility customers a dollar to use their credit cards to pay their bill? Talk about creating waste!
It goes something like this when using a credit card: Phone City Hall, give person credit card number, person enters payment on computer, bill paid.

Now our fiscal managers have created another scenario: Write a check, put it in a stamped envelope for the postman to collect it and drive it to the post office where others will spend time and effort handling it and delivering it to City Hall where it must be handled again, entered into the system and then the check must be sent to the bank for further handling by others.

Can you see the waste of fuel, paper, postage, manpower, energy, time and materials and the addition of fossil fuel emissions to our atmosphere — all because our city’s administrators want to save a few cents on credit card service fees?

Talk about blind, self-centered fiscal and environmental irresponsibility. And these people are in charge of spending our tax money? I’m thinking Alice’s Mad Hatter and the demented Queen are more rational than they.

T. C. STREFF
Grand Junction

Local company shows way to maintain landscape

Thank you Bud Signs for your beautifully maintained landscaping. It’s a pleasure to drive by on my commute to work every day. Too bad your neighbors don’t take a clue.

DEBI SHORT
Grand Junction

City and county differ on prayers

Thanks to The Daily Sentinel for the invaluable free publicity in the July 31 editorial “Fishing for publicity.” I am flattered to be dubbed a “constitutional authority” (even if “self-anointed”). In fact, all it actually takes is the ability to read the court cases that the Sentinel assiduously ignores.

However, two additional facts are relevant. First, I briefed the county commissioners and the county attorney on the apparent state of the law two months ago. Second, both the City Council and the commissioners are sworn to support the Constitution.

Thus, I provided copies of my open records request to the press because you have been remiss in not focusing on the remarkably different approaches to the invocation matter taken by our City Council and our county commissioners. The former is acting responsibly to determine what the law is and has committed itself to coming into compliance. By contrast, at least one commissioner does not seem to even care what the constitutional law is that she has sworn to uphold.

Like it or not, the county’s irresponsible approach to the matter is already a political issue — thanks to the Sentinel’s own uninformed editorials. After all, the same commissioner who routinely violates the civil rights of her non-Christian constituents remained strangely silent when it came to the prayer service at the fairgrounds. The Sentinel should at least acknowledge that I immediately advised both the commissioners and the Sentinel that there was no constitutional reason to cancel that service.

With the Sentinel’s complicity, Janet Rowland has turned the definition of “bullying” on its head. A bully ignores the playground rules to intimidate others. Here, the atheists have asked our elected officials to simply follow the law, but are accused of attempting to “bully” them into doing what they are already sworn to do.

The Sentinel has done little to accurately educate its readership as to what the law requires — while I have occasionally stirred up controversy in order to help you sell newspapers.

BILL HUGENBERG
Grand Junction

Candidate supports ecumenical prayer

The Daily Sentinel’s reporting of my response at the debate in Fruita on Monday evening was correct. The question about prayer before commission meetings was first addressed to me and I didn’t answer it directly. Allow me to be more direct here. I fully support an ecumenical prayer at commission meetings.

The Marsh case and subsequent cases do make it clear that prayer before government functions is acceptable as long as it does not promote a specific religion. Prayer anywhere else outside of government, like at the fairgrounds, is completely acceptable as long as everyone has an equal right to speak.

Our right to free speech and assembly is clearly protected by our Constitution. Those with a political agenda often take advantage of the confusion that is caused by the wisdom shown by our founding fathers in insisting that church and state be kept separate. Most of our founding fathers were good Christians. All they wanted to do is prevent potential abuse that can come from mixing the two. Extremes on both sides of the political spectrum try to exploit this confusion.

Allow me to be perfectly clear: Jesus Christ is my personal savior. I believe He expects me to respect and treat with tolerance others who do not believe as I do. To say that it is just a few troublesome atheists who feel that tolerance is important is to overlook many others in our community, like those of the Jewish faith, who could be made to feel like second-rate citizens for not being Christian. These minority groups are a few voters, but as a commissioner I will work to protect their rights too. Please, do not allow this to become a contest for who is the best Christian.

The county does not have to spend a lot of money in litigation to determine that prayer is acceptable under well-established law. It would be easy for commissioners to pray in an ecumenical way in their invocation at commission meetings. I fully support such a prayer, as does the law.

DAVID A. KEARSLEY
Mesa

This entry was posted on Thursday, July 31st, 2008 at 6:01 am and is filed under Printed letters. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.