County’s painfully ironic stance

Even by Boulder standards, the irony of suggesting a resident who files a lawsuit to prevent Boulder County from developing a commercial factor y on open space land, protected by a perpetual conser vation easement, is a NIMBY cannot be overstated.

After all, has there ever been a land-use policy that more precisely characterizes NIMBYISM than open space itself?

Boulder County’s taxpayer-funded open space inventor y now surpasses 105,000 acres of land. An additional 40,000 acres are protected by county-held conser vation easements. In the county’s words, “Conser vation easements are designed to protect agricultural land, wildlife habitat, and scenic open space from development.”

City of Boulder taxpayers have purchased an additional 46,000 acres of open space. Combined, Boulder County and the City of Boulder own and/or control more than 192,000 acres of land. That is 11.7 times larger than the entire land area of the City of Boulder.

Boulder County’s No. 1 goal of open space is “to preserve rural lands and buf fers.” To be clear, a “buffer” is a boundary extension that prevents a neighboring community from developing in, or impacting, Boulder’s backyard.

That’s right, Not In My Back Yard. For more than a centur y, local residents have generously funded an explicit policy of gluttonous, Nimby-driven land hoarding.

Other recent taxpayer lawsuits against Boulder County Commissioners’ broken promises have established, absent an actual “backyard” adjacency, the average Joe taxpayer no longer has “standing” to bring an action.

So, when three open space neighbors rise, at great personal expense, to collectively oppose the county’s violation of its own policies against commercial development on protected public lands, they are standing up for us all, and for all open space.

For that, they should be thanked, not subjected to insult, nor chastised, ridiculed or arrogantly dismissed by the county and its proxy policy activists as self-interested NIMBYS. KATHY Young

Erie I agree that being homeless shouldn’t be a crime.

The problem with Mr. Sutter’s asser tion is that it’s simply not true.

The City of Boulder has some of the best homeless ser vices in the countr y, including housing ser vices, job readiness programs and addiction and mental health ser vices.

On average, there are 30 open beds nightly in the shelter. Individuals living in encampments are not only refusing ser vices, some of them are committing crimes, many violent.

At the Jan. 19 City Council meeting, Boulder’s police chief presented details on what’s happening within the encampments: Authorities are finding hazardous waste, including drug paraphernalia, weapons, propane tanks, human waste and stolen bikes (valuing $2.1 million).

As a community, we need to have compassion for those in need. Fighting for their right to stay on the streets is not compassionate.

It’s inhumane to allow people to freeze in tents, and to allow human feces and used needles in parks where children are supposed to feel safe to play.

Who’s benefiting by allowing the encampments to thrive? The tax-paying citizens of Boulder?

Those living in the encampments having to defecate on the streets and freeze at night?

As a homeless advocate myself, I feel it is time to delineate between individuals and families who are struggling and those who are committing crimes and trashing our creek and public spaces without the willingness to get help.

If you want a glimpse of where Boulder is headed if we continue to allow these encampments, watch the documentar y “Seattle Is Dying.”

Instead of fighting to keep the unhoused individuals on the streets, let’s fight for some long-term solutions that address addiction and mental health, while keeping our community safe and giving these folks some dignity. SUE B. mcmillan

Boulder

But that railcar left the station, never to be seen again. Many passenger rail enthusiasts in our region were disappointed this was not immediately put into operation.

I am no genius. ( My former clients would attest to that.) With some imagination, ingenuity and sacrifice, this train could still be implemented.

Elaborate multimilliondollar stations with amphitheater and landscaping like the Westminster location (72nd. and Hooker) should be delayed, putting the money toward immediate train operation.

Don’t waste money on magnificent railroad art. That comes later, after the wheels are rolling.

Simple covered platforms meeting handicapped and safety requirements can be built. Some existing rail sidings can be utilized at Broomfield, Boulder and Longmont to accommodate platforms and operational concerns.

Transportation technicians with R TD can do this without expensive consulting. Star t with a limited schedule to accommodate working commuters and freight ser vice. Building for the future sometimes requires little steps.

We will have to share the track with Burlington Northern Santa Fe. Freight and passenger trains have been doing it for over 175 years. Amtrak does it. BNSF will want big bucks to share the rail. Negotiate with the major shareholder of BNSF, Warren Buffet; he seems like a reasonable guy.

That train did leave the station, and someone else with greater imagination bought it and is using it, but we can bring one just like it back to our station.

We have been paying for this a long time and have yet to ride it.

PAT Beckham

Lafayette