Questions about school bond issue

Another bond issue for School District 51 is in the works. But before I throw my support behind it, I’d like to ask a few questions to the stewards of our money.

How come when I attend a football game at Central High School I have to wade through putrid water on the track to reach the stands? Why are the fences and lawns in such disrepair? Why is it that only middle schools in Grand Junction and Fruita have track and field facilities to practice on? Why do the funds seem to continually go to the schools where the professionals live and not the working class areas like Orchard Mesa and Clifton?

I live on Orchard Mesa and my son goes to Central. The lack of credible maintenance in these boundaries is abysmal. The district needs to prove to me that they can maintain what they have and then ask me for more money to build more schools.

ALLEN BURNS
Grand Junction

Barack Obama is
‘all front and no back’

I disagree with the experts that the West Slope Independents will carry Colorado for Sen. Obama, as stated in the Sept. 12 edition of The Daily Sentinel. Western voters are independent thinkers and I seriously doubt that they are going to overwhelmingly vote for Obama.

He has absolutely no idea of the problems and needs of the Rocky Mountain States, including the West Slope. Democrats John and Ken Salazar and Gov. Bill Ritter were elected, not because there is a shift to the Democratic Party. The Democrats simply fielded candidates who were more closely related to the interests and needs of all Colorado citizens.

The late movie actor Brandon DeWilde (The boy in the movie “Shane”) described Hollywood as “All front and no back.” That is how I personally view Sen. Obama, “All front and no back.” Like Hollywood, he puts on a good performance and talks a good talk, but there isn’t much substance behind the scenes.

NEAL A. WARD
Delta

Energy proposal isn’t
the ‘kitchen sink’

Responding to Congressman Udall’s letter to the editor regarding energy development, I must take umbrage with several points. Mr. Udall expresses that we “need to throw the kitchen sink” at the energy crisis. I agree, however, the Gang of 10 proposal he cites isn’t exactly the “kitchen sink.”

Now, there are some good aspects of the plan. It mentions nuclear power. That’s great … if it can get past the NIMBYism.

Also, I hate to break it to Mark Udall, but we import most of our uranium under current circumstances, because we only have one mill in operation. Oh, and our nuclear waste depository site in Nevada is adamantly opposed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, so good luck with that.

It mentions renewables. Great! But he plans to pay for the research and development by taxing the oil and gas industry and funding renewable research with the revenues. There is something inherently wrong with the government choosing its favorite industries, and picking the pockets of others to pay for them.

Rep. Udall should stop citing the record profits. The profit margins of oil companies are average as far as industry goes. Profit vs. profit margin is Economics 101, and I’m sure Mr. Udall knows the difference. Also, the Shapiro/Pham study has dispelled the myth of the evil oil exec making off with obscene profits. Joe Lunchbucket owns most of the oil companies in his retirement account.

Finally, the plan mentions opening more drilling — in the Gulf of Mexico, which, while it has a very large oil reserve, is already almost entirely open to drilling. No West Coast, East Coast, ANWR, tar sands (12-19 billion barrels) or oil shale (1.23 trillion barrels).

Mr. Udall’s “kitchen sink” is more a handful of concessions he can make without feeling too un-green.

BRIAN MEINHART
Grand Junction

This entry was posted on Monday, September 15th, 2008 at 6:41 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.