Church should pay
the full impact fee
The $82,670 gift to the First Assembly of God Church is not a tax break, it’s a gift of your money. The transportation impact fee is not a tax; it is a means of having new growth pay a portion of its impact on the capacity of the road systems. We, the taxpayers of this valley, will have to make up that $82,670 when the increased traffic requires improving a road.
Traffic is generated by a new home or a new destination, regardless of the purpose of that destination. Vehicles, going from a home to a church use the road, using part of the capacity of that road to handle traffic.
Further, the Mesa County Commission’s action now places the commission in a position to grant such gifts to any other church which may want to increase traffic on the local road system. In fact, I am uncertain how the commission may exempt a church destination and not a convenience store destination. To make up that kind of discrepancy, the county will need to double the transportation impact fee paid for each new residence.
The argument that the improvements being required by the state somehow offset the local impact fee is nonsense. Those improvements are for property access, not for providing for increased capacity.
There is something wrong with government giving, by way of exemption, funds to any religious organization.  A terrible and thoughtless precedent has been set.
Curiously, on a different matter dealing with annexation of the Clifton/Fruitvale area, concerning residents only paying 19 percent of the cost of county resources, Commissioner Janet Rowland stated, “We are not paying our own way.” Why is the First Assembly of God Church not paying its way concerning the impact fee?
Elected officials need to participate in representative government, not handpick beneficiaries like churches to reap financial rewards. With state and county funding being compromised during these difficult times, couldn’t the commissioners foresee the future impact of their actions?
MARGARET PEARSON
Grand Junction

Harmon misunderstands
religion and government
As is so often the case, Gary Harmon misunderstands and, therefore, misinterprets an important issue with local implications. This time it’s the role of religion in government. Taking as his starting point a character in a puerile movie, he proceeds to disparage the Freedom from Religion Foundation for its sponsorship of the billboard “Keep Religion OUT of Government” on North Avenue.
Mr. Harmon makes a basic error in stating that “it’s really not possible to keep religion out of politics” whereas the concern of FFRF (and the Western Colorado Atheists and Freethinkers who co-sponsor of the billboard) is to keep religion out of government. It’s a fact of modern politics that politicians will appeal to majoritarian faith-based views, but once they are elected the responsible ones will keep separate their religious opinions from their legislative duties.
Mr. Harmon’s pontifications using his straw man Walter Peck from the movie lead him to further strange imaginings. He invokes “FFRF thought police” that would tell people how to vote — pure fantasy on his part. Continuing his delusions, he has the chutzpah to tell us that Jefferson should have used the botany metaphor of osmosis instead of “wall” in separating church and state. (Science note to Mr. Harmon: osmosis is a physical phenomenon, not botanical). And neither Jefferson nor the First Amendment say that “religion is perfectly free to act on government,” although — and here is one of the few places Mr. Harmon gets it right — “but there is no reverse flow” i.e., government should keep out of religion.
The constitutional “protection” invoked in Mr. Harmon’s last sentence also covers, no doubt to his discomfiture, non-believers in the entanglement of religion and government, and all his appeals to Walter Peck will not change that basic fact.
EARLE MULLEN, President
Western Colorado
Atheists and Freethinkers
Grand Junction

All religions are really
political organizations
“Religion will always have a role in government.” Good write-up, Gary Harmon, but why didn’t you go a bit further with the truth?
All organizations we call religions are really political organizations and should be treated as such. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with that as long as we are all reading from the same page.
D. G. EGGENSPERGER
Grand Junction

District 51 would be
well served by Pugliese
I don’t always agree with the political endorsements of The Daily Sentinel’s editorial board, but in the case of the School District race, I couldn’t agree more. Both Rose Pugliese and Greg Mikolai would serve the school district well, but I too support Rose Pugliese.
I am especially pleased about Rose’s plan to work with the school district to implement more options in their current school-to-career programs.
Many students aren’t college-bound, which is why it is critical to ensure that the school district offers educational tracks that inspire students to stay in school and gives them the tools they need to be successful after their graduation.
Rose is very energetic. I have known many community volunteers but only a few that work as tirelessly as Rose. Rose is always looking for new and innovative ways to improve any project that she is working on, which is why I believe she will be a great addition to the school board.
But you don’t have to take my word for it. You can learn more about Rose at www.RoseForSchoolBoard.com.
JANET ROWLAND
Grand Junction
Sheriff should prohibit staff
from driving and using cells
Stan Hilkey may be a good sheriff who should be able to run and be elected to a third term, but one standard for judging his performance might be the concern he shows for the safety of the public in the way he administers the department.
The Mesa County Sheriff’s Department has no policy prohibiting employees from using cell phones while driving while on duty.
They concede that it is dangerous and that they have “talked about it,” but I’d feel more confident in the sheriff’s judgment if he did something about it.
RICHARD H. GAMBLE
Grand Junction

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 14th, 2009 at 8:13 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.