Preserving Wheat Ridge’s Olinger mansion
Re: “Olinger mansion awaits its fate,” Feb. 13 news story.
Truly one of the gems remaining in Wheat Ridge is the graceful Olinger complex at West 29th Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard. Years ago its Roman-style colonnade along Wadsworth lent a classic serenity to the route. Situated across Wadsworth from the stately Crown Hill Cemetery, it belongs to the area. If given historical landmark designation, it cannot be torn down.
Thankfully, your article alerted the community to an impending tragedy. Wheat Ridge has precious little of this history and beauty to hang on to. My understanding of the 2020 plan to upgrade Wheat Ridge is that it also values retaining exceptional historical and aesthetic features that distinguish it from other communities. Certainly other property could better serve a developer for commercial zoning, and Wheat Ridge could be left with its treasure.
Very little has been publicized about this issue. With one exception, everyone I took a petition to had not heard about it, signed it readily, and thanked me for doing the petition. This tells me that people here want it saved.
The Wheat Ridge City Council will vote on a hoped-for compromise between the Wheat Ridge Historical Society, which is proposing the historical landmark designation, and the developer on Feb. 27. I hope they save the mansion and its historical grounds.
Barbara Leichty, Wheat Ridge
Court decision in favor of Rocky Flats neighbors
Re: “Flats plaintiffs due $554 million,” Feb. 15 news story.
Hooray for juries! I was beginning to believe that our jury system could be bought and paid for by large corporations and the government. How unfortunate that these wonderful and heroic plaintiffs – 12,000 property owners who live downwind of Rocky Flats – had to wait 16 years for a group of their peers to stand up and say, “You’re right,” when we knew all along that they were.
But how unfortunate that the merry band of legal defense thugs are going to make a large profit off the plaintiffs’ injuries. How very unfortunate and sad that our taxpayer dollars are funding the government’s attempt at hiding and suppressing the truth (no surprise there). Why did we pay defense lawyers $58 million to defend a case that had no defense? Why didn’t we just offer that to the plaintiffs? And who knows how long this will go on?
I want to shake the hand of every juror and say on behalf of the entire citizenry of Colorado: thank you. I want to thank the judge for a thoughtful, clear and precedent-setting trial. But most of all, I want to thank the plaintiffs for having the guts to stand up for 16 years and tell this government that it cannot put a price tag on our health and safety. It could not have come at a better time.
Jeanne Zierk Moore, Denver
. . .
The verdict in favor of Rocky Flats plaintiffs is an excellent first step in the transformation of the nuclear-weapons plant property into a wildlife refuge. But to think that the dangers associated with the site have been trucked or cemented away would be erroneous. Even the U.S. Department of Energy recognizes this in its establishing the Rocky Flats Stewardship Council. The site will forever be something to be maintained and watched. It will never be simply benign nature. Although state Rep. Wes McKinley’s legislation to inform future visitors to the property was defeated last year, now is the right time to bring it back – the public has a right to know exactly what kind of land they tread upon.
Thomas J. Holahan, Boulder
Proposed changes to Colo. seat-belt laws
I did not read Ed Quillen’s column on the proposed seat-belt law (“Seat-belt law wouldn’t help,” Jan. 29); however, I think the letters responding to it (Feb. 5 Open Forum) miss the mark.
It is not the purpose of the government to protect us from ourselves. Seat belts do not prevent accidents. They will not make our roads safer. They will not alter the fact that “millions of people in traffic, encountering dangerous situations thousands of times at any given moment,” will still do so. They may save my life if I am wearing one. They may also (and I personally know of cases) cause a fatality if they are worn. This should be an individual choice. Anyone who wants to wear a seat belt should. They shouldn’t need a law to tell them to.
The grief of losing a loved one never does go away, I know. And trying to help possible victims is commendable and compassionate, but we must do it by being responsible for ourselves and not by giving up our right to individual choice. Take responsibility for your own actions and choose to wear a seat belt because you feel safe, not because you gave up your right to make the choice.
Ann Shaffer, Parker
. . .
I don’t get it. I’ve tried to figure out why we would want to change the seat-belt law other than to have something to get a little ticket-writing revenue if it’s a slow day for speeders.
I could, under the proposed law, be ticketed for disregarding my own safety by driving my car without wearing a seat belt. The protection offered by four wheels, thousands of pounds of steel surrounding me, scientifically designed crumple zones, and airbags on all sides is just not enough. The state, however, has no problem with me hopping on my 500-pound, two-wheeled “crotch rocket” and roaring off into the night. It has no seat belt, and is responsible for many deaths each year. And I don’t even have to wear a helmet on my motorcycle.
David Sorg, Denver
Coverage of shooting by VP Dick Cheney
I’m not a Dick Cheney fan. I think the present U.S. administration has done greater harm to the country than any other, ever. However, the ongoing coverage of Cheney’s recent hunting accident reveals more fault in our news media than in Cheney’s behavior.
First, journalism isn’t about “newsworthy people,” like Cheney, being obligated to report newsworthy events in their lives to the media. The media should be monitoring appropriate channels, such as the law enforcement community, to discover newsworthy events. I abhor the Cheney/Bush illegal wiretaps, but I defend Cheney’s right to privacy as well. He needn’t “tell” on himself.
Lew Colgan, Centennial
Questions of faith
Re: “Life after grief,” Feb. 12 news story.
The story of the chaplain who lost a 3-day-old child and how he questions his faith is a religious story and really has no business being on the front page or in the newspaper at all. Do the Muslims demand equal time? The Jews?
Many people who have lost children are going to suggest, “Try raising and loving a child for years and losing them to know true sadness.” If anything, this more than questions faith, it questions religion, and how people believe they or rather their prayers can control their lives. God doesn’t punish anyone, nor is fate selective.
This incident points more to the idea that you can’t control your life through your faith or your dedication, such as that of a chaplain.
Keith Francis, Morrison
Colorado Voices
If you have good ideas and a writer’s touch, we hope you’ll apply for Colorado Voices. It is a den for part-time columnists, a feature we created in 1999 as a forum for contributors from across the state.
Send us two sample columns, 600 to 700 words each, along with a cover letter describing your background, your interest in Voices and whatever else you think we need to know.
Deadline for entries is 5 p.m. on Monday, Feb. 20. E-mail them to us at voices@denverpost.com, or by mail to Mary Idler, Denver Post Editorial Page, 1560 Broadway, Denver CO 80202. Provide your address, phone numbers and e-mail address.
Typically, our Voices write every other week for three months. Once published, you’ll get a modest honorarium, impressive clips and bragging rights.
The Open Forum
Phone: 303-820-1331
E-mail: openforum@denverpost.com (only straight text, not attachments)
Mail: The Open Forum, The Denver Post, 1560 Broadway, Denver, 80202
Fax: 303-820-1502
