Retirement association problems
Re: “Crafting a PERA-chute,” Sept. 15 news story.
I am writing in response to all of the negative publicity your newspaper has given to the Public Employee Retirement Association recently. PERA is by far the best retirement program, bar none. Just because the whole economy is in a slump and PERA reflects that, it certainly does not mean that PERA recipients will be a burden on society if state legislators don’t step in and wave their magic wand.
We want to have board members who have been elected by PERA members, not state legislators. The association has had leaner years than this. Why all of a sudden do certain politicians want to have their hands in where they don’t belong? When the economy was good, PERA benefited by it, along with many other investors.
We need to tell Dick Lamm to find something else to do besides meddle in PERA business. By the way, let’s ask Mr. Lamm how he is enjoying his PERA benefits today!
Cheryll Stevens, Fort Morgan
…
Why is it that any other debt owed is a debt, but a debt for deferred compensation, promised and owed to a loyal employee for years of service, is a “liability” in this country?
Cynthia Barnes, Denver
Recovering from Hurricane Katrina
Mr. President, I am becoming increasingly frustrated with your scattered response to Hurricane Katrina. At first, you shrugged it off as an epic-yet-manageable disaster, saying the federal government was doing a “heck of a job” before you decided to actually spent some time down in the trenches. Admittedly, it is heartening to see you finally taking real accountability for the federal government’s lack of response. But now, I fear, you are repeating the same monumental mistake you made after the fallout of Sept. 11: overreacting.
Instead of pledging to rebuild a city in disaster’s way, perhaps it is time to learn from history and go in a different direction. Leadership, as you have told us, is not always doing what is popular. If nature does not want you to be there, don’t encourage people to live there. And certainly don’t create incentives for people to rebuild. If you go forward with this plan, you will be condemning these people, or their children, or their grandchildren, or great-grandchildren to repeat the very same fate that befell them.
Please, Mr. President, do not spend the already overburdened taxpayers’ money rebuilding a sandcastle-city. It is a monumental waste of our country’s resources. You have already tied up enough funds fighting a war fueled by your overreaction to terrorist attacks. Instead, find a way to encourage these people to relocate and rebuild their lives out of harm’s way. As we have seen, the people of this great country are already accepting these victims with open arms, and we should extend this hospitality as permanent invitations to grow roots in our communities. I believe that is the best way to address the issue of the displaced.
Giles J. Conway, Littleton
…
Just because President Bush has maxed out his “collateral,” I prefer that he not commit mine by making promises to rebuild New Orleans, with “whatever it takes” (including my Medicare) to get his feet out of the fire.
He doesn’t even know what it will cost.
Typical.
B. Willits, Fort Lupton
Examine existing Front Range water issues
Re: “Water idea should spark discussion,” Sept. 12 editorial
The Green Mountain pump- back project first surfaced about 15 to 20 years ago in the midst of the Two Forks Dam debate. It was offered as the lesser of two evils. Two Forks is one of the few projects that could make an idea like Green Mountain look good.
If Green Mountain were implemented, it would reduce flows in the Colorado River from Kremmling to the state line; its accompanying 25-mile-long pipeline would require enormous energy to operate; it would necessitate the construction of a second reservoir (at Wolcott, that would also require pumping) to replace the function of Green Mountain; and, in the end, it would produce water as costly as a bottle of Perrier.
Front Range cities and water utilities already have the capacity to take more than 600,000 acre- feet of water from the Colorado River, almost a third of the flow of the river’s headwaters. They are planning to take more right now via projects that the Denver Water Board and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District have under review.
It is time, in my opinion, for the Front Range to look at what it can do with the water it already controls. It must look to improving efficiency, linking existing systems, recycling all its transbasin water and developing cooperative agreements with the South Platte’s biggest user: agriculture.
Before it begins another round of negotiating with the Western Slope, it should more carefully tend the garden in its own backyard.
The Colorado environmental community has recently proposed such an approach in “Facing Our Future: A Balanced Water Solution for Colorado.”
Not surprisingly, Green Mountain does not appear on its list of options.
Dan Luecke, Boulder
The writer is a technical consultant who works with a number of environmental groups on water issues.
Sicily is where?
Re: “Mangia,” Sept. 21 Food section.
When I saw your sketch of Italy, my jaw dropped. My Sicilian ancestors must be spinning in their graves and furiously giving your editors the malocchio (evil eye). How could you misplace the largest island in the Mediterranean? Hint: It’s just off the toe of the Italian boot. And it’s very definitely part of Italy.
Sicilians are known for carrying a grudge. But if you express sincere remorse, we’ll let you off the hook this one time. Relax, go out to your favorite ristorante and have a glass of wine, a big plate of pasta and maybe a nice cannoli for dessert.
Oh, and on the way home, why don’t you stop off and get yourself a decent atlas?
James J. Amato, Woodland Park
Davis-Bacon suspension
Re: “Davis-Bacon Act’s suspension a good thing,” Sept. 22 Open Forum.
I have been reading and listening to the rhetoric about the Bush administration’s decision to suspend the Davis-Bacon act for contractors rebuilding the Gulf Coast region. Letter-writer Mark M. Latimer suggests it is a good idea. On some levels it is.
But if anyone thinks that these contractors will reduce the hourly rate they charge the government to offset the lower wages they might pay, I have a bridge in New York you might be interested in purchasing. How about we open the books on the rebuilding contractors and limit the no-bid profit to 2 percent?
Brian LeFevre, Brighton
Noise disclaimer
Re: “Another noise problem for homeowners,” Sept. 22 Open Forum.
I had to laugh at J.R. Evanger’s letter concerning the Denver City Council’s OK for plans for houses near Denver International Airport. While questioning the brain capacity of the council members is usually appropriate, it doesn’t apply here. It would make more sense to question the intelligence of people who would choose to live so close to an airport, and then complain about the noise.
If 3,000 families want to live next to DIA, who cares? Why not let them? A bullet-proof noise disclaimer indemnifying the city against any noise-related legal action should be required for all property purchases in the area. If a property buyer doesn’t take heed, so what? Whose fault and problem is that?
J.B. Reed, Denver
