Lori Call: CU Boulder: We are a leader in the fight against climate change
A December 3 guest advisory from Steven Telleen “Right here, now” suggested that CU Boulder does not deserve to host a major climate summit based on the recent annexation of CU Boulder South, alleging that the university does not follow his words. This couldn’t be further from the truth. I am writing to correct the inaccuracies – to clarify CU’s climate commitment and to dispel the flawed comments made about the environmental impacts of annexation.
CU Boulder was invited to host the Right Here, Right Now World Climate Summit in partnership with the United Nations for Human Rights due to our strength in environmental science research, ranked # 1 to the world in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. The buildings we construct on campus live up to this reputation, with over two dozen LEED Gold or better certifications, including 11 Platinum. And the Chancellor committed CU Boulder to carbon neutrality by 2050. The university’s ethics of sustainability are also embedded in CU Boulder South’s approach.
Mr. Telleen falsely suggested that there would be development in the floodplain at CU Boulder South. This is categorically wrong. The annexation agreement guarantees that no development will be allowed even in the 500-year-old floodplain.
In addition, Mr. Telleen suggested that the annexation provides inadequate space for flood mitigation. In fact, CU will transfer half of the site (155 acres) to the city for flood protection, new open spaces and habitat restoration.
This is in addition to increasing home equity in Boulder and reducing emissions by helping more people live where they work.
The CU Boulder South and Climate Summit showcase the University of Boulder’s and community’s commitment to sustainability. We look forward to hosting an event that will bring world leaders to town, inspiring new climate action in Boulder and around the world.
Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Local Government and Community Engagement
Daniel Weller: Boulder Rifle Club: Boulder County Commissioners to Explain New Funding
Boulder County Commissioners recently set aside $ 1 million to help renovate and further develop the private Boulder Rifle Club. This nugget of information was buried deep in the 2022 Boulder County budget approved earlier this month. The county’s funding coincides with nearly $ 1 million in state grants to provide a shooting range that will allow the US Forest Service to close 70,000 acres of land for gun sports.
The Boulder Rifle Club expansion was denied by the Boulder County Planning Commission in 2020; and the project sparked extreme public opposition (by a margin of nearly 3 to 1 by neighbors) last year in public comments before the County Commissioners Council. However, the commissioners decided to approve a lean version of the Rifle Club’s expansion plans anyway.
Members of the Boulder Rifle Club were unhappy with the reduced approval they received for phase one-only approval, citing a cost of over $ 5 million to start the project. The new restrictions included an independent sound study and an environmental study, as the Rifle Club was located on land that was previously a garbage dump.
The county’s position is that the funding will ensure that federal lands can be closed to shooting in the mountains. Does anyone really believe that irresponsible gun owners will suddenly stop when these areas are marked “closed”? The real problem is the app. There will never be enough law enforcement officers to control this kind of illegal activity; especially if we continue to fund police forces and “reinvent” the police.
Funding the Boulder Rifle Club with taxpayer dollars is a slap in the face for this community and for families still reeling from the tragic events at King Soopers last March. If Boulder County is overflowing with cash, why not provide more financial assistance to families directly affected by this tragedy?
The citizens of Boulder County are entitled to an immediate explanation on this matter from the entire County Council of Commissioners.
Martha H. Jones: COVID-19 Hospital Expenses: Forget the carrot, let’s get the stick out
Our government has borne much of the cost of controlling expenses related to COVID-19. We tried the carrot for almost two years; now is the time to use the stick. My suggestion:
Starting February 1, the law should require anyone who is unvaccinated to be responsible for half of all their medical bills when they fall ill with COVID. This means that no type of insurance – private, corporate, Medicare, Medicaid, Obama Care, etc. – will not be legally responsible for more than half of the expenses. The patient should also be placed at the back of the queue for any wait for a hospital bed.
Those people who are convinced that they will never catch it or that it is okay if they do, should be the ones who suffer the consequences when they catch it, not the ones who have been vaccinated, wear a mask in the crowd and are cautious. It sounds drastic, I know, but we’ve all had almost two years to pull ourselves together. Enough!
They should be required to put their money where they say it is. The medical staff are exhausted and most of us are punished by the insanity of a few.
Martha H. Jones
Lesa Morris: Union Reservoir: I will not be coming back
Union Reservoir was my favorite place to go kayaking, until I read the benzene levels recorded in neighboring neighborhoods. (“Colorado Health Officials Detect High Benzene in Weld County Community,” Denver Post Dec. 15) Last summer, as I paddled around the lake observing bird habitat, I spotted a hydraulic fracturing site. As I approached, I heard the roar of heavy equipment drilling deep inside the rock formations. What a horrible sound that interrupted my peaceful state of mind. I am not going back to Union Res and will be looking for another place to kayak next summer. When are we going to learn that hydraulic fracturing is NOT SAFE for humans or wildlife and destroys our quality of life? And did I mention the effects on climate change!