sleepystork.com

Library funding assures opportunities for rural, low-income people

As an adult services librarian in northern Colorado, I’ve seen firsthand how federal funding strengthens our libraries and, through them, our communities. At my library, federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds help support digital literacy training, homebound delivery services, and access to job-seeking resources for people who might not otherwise have a place to turn.

These are not luxuries — they are lifelines, especially for rural and lower-income Coloradans. In many small towns, the public library is the only place with reliable internet access, the only place where veterans can find support services, where students can complete homework, and where older adults can learn to navigate online health care portals.

Right now, Congress must act to maintain funding for both the LSTA and the Innovative Approaches to Literacy (IAL) program, which supports school libraries. Without federal support, our ability to meet local needs could be deeply compromised.

This year, the White House proposed eliminating federal support for libraries altogether. That’s why I’m calling on Sen. John Hickenlooper, Sen. Michael Bennet, and Colorado’s House delegation to reject that proposal and ensure that at least $232 million for LSTA and $30 million for IAL are included in the FY26 federal budget.

Libraries reflect the values and resilience of their communities — but we can’t do it alone. Federal support ensures that every Coloradan, no matter their ZIP code, can access the tools and opportunities they need to thrive.

— Dania Laubach, Greeley

Photo tells a different story

Re: “Volunteers flock to courts to support migrants arrested in the hallways,” July 21 news photo

Let’s be honest and evenhanded. This man is not being “escorted.” He is being bullied and apprehended as if he were a criminal.

— Meg Johnson, Denver

More truth about all the lying

Re: “Presidential struggles with telling the truth,” July 17 letter to the editor

My primary quibble with the letter is that it doesn’t go far enough.

In a democratic republic, such as the USA, informed consent of voters is essential to its preservation. It’s why the freedoms of speech, press, religion (i.e., thought) and assembly are the first rights to be guaranteed.

Yet we have undergone six decades of leaders lying about (often) very important matters; when they don’t actually lie, they “spin” with half-truths and evasions. There’s a whole industry of people cooking up “talking points” to fool and distract us. It seems to have reached a point where many voters just assume that all politicians lie all the time.

Truth can be hard. Apart from ego damage, it can have political costs. Truth-telling requires courage, which now seems in short supply among our leaders.

But it isn’t enough to just complain about the problem; we need solutions. Let’s start by using our votes to punish those who promulgate lies and reward those who tell (even the hard) truth.

— Ralph Taylor, Centennial

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Readers not buying this bridge

Re: “Gov. Polis’ pedestrian bridge has a long way to go,” July 13 editorial

The editorial laid out great reasons that this project should be scrapped:

1) The cost is unaffordable with today’s budget constraints.

2) The design failed to follow mandated design guidelines.

3) “Undulating waves like Colorado’s white-water rapids” – really? Have any of the designers actually been white water rafting? Hint, it’s called “white water” for a reason.

4) “From the steps of the Capitol looking west, visitors see a panoramic view that includes our iconic skyline, art museum, Central Library, Denver’s beautiful city hall and our majestic mountains” — yet they want to block the mountain view with a bridge to nowhere.

This is part of the problem with all the transplants (and I am referring to all the politicians) to Colorado — they don’t recognize what we have to offer with natural beauty.

Mark D Cutright, Englewood

This is a big, stupid waste of money that could be spent on important things like homelessness, hunger, fighting ICE raids, covering new Medicare gaps, etc.

Susan Hooyengaj, Denver

The editorial can best be described as wishy-washy.

We don’t see any redeeming aspects to the proposal. It will ruin an iconic vista for absolutely no reason. It won’t solve a problem but instead will likely create a few. It will cost a fortune, money that should be better spent elsewhere.

“Private donors and a visionary architect” cannot correct these issues. This project is an affront to the dignity of the historic area and is completely unnecessary. It should be abandoned before any more money is spent.

Judy and Larry Trompeter, Denver

Talking reason about unreasonable politicians

Re: “A guide for Colorado lawmakers to keep their feet out of their mouths,” July 13 commentary

Twice now, I have actually agreed with Krista Kafer. Her comments on the stupidity of George Teal, a Douglas County Commissioner, and state Rep. Ron Weinberg were right on the mark.

To be near my three granddaughters, I moved from north Denver to Douglas County. The good thing is I am eight minutes from my granddaughters. The bad news is I have to live in Douglas County. Parker and Castle Rock are not much better and Castle Rock might be worse. Don’t even get me started on Elizabeth.

As the Trump administration continues to chip away at the Constitution — through challenging birthright citizenship and passing his “Big Beautiful Bill,” which is going to affect the poorest, most vulnerable people in our country — I wonder where this is all going to end. The deporting of U.S. citizens and creating his own private army with the expansion of ICE at the taxpayers’ expense is egregious.

Maybe it is time for Krista Kafer to re-examine her political affiliation. I don’t expect her to become a Democrat. But I think she is slowly transforming into an independent. Ironically, according to a Gallup poll, those identifying as independent in this country comprise a larger number than those identifying as Republicans or Democrats. I only expect that disparity to continue to grow.

Welcome aboard, Krista. There is room for you with all the other independents. I think you might actually realize in today’s environment, this is not a bad place to be.

David Shaw, Highlands Ranch

Krista Kafer’s column last Sunday, while entirely appropriate in calling out George Teal and state Rep. Ron Weinberg, misses a larger truth. Donald Trump has elevated lying to new heights. Trump proves over and over again that it is OK to lie, then just deny you ever said it or double down by repeating it.

The fact that your lie was recorded? Not important to those legions of supporters not interested in facts. Teal and Weinberg are following this new model: the ‘art of the lie’. I doubt there will be repercussions for Teal and Weinberg, just as Trump’s lies are simply shrugged off by so many.

Paul Mauro, Aurora

Parents right to weigh in on gender education

Re: “U.S. Supreme Court got it right on parental rights and education,” July 6 commentary, and “Education opt-out: Rules for me, but not for thee?,” July 13 letters

It was shameful to see how the Jones family was disparaged first by employees of their school district and then by fellow Denver Post readers, all for opting their 6-year-old out of classroom lessons. In short, the Jones family said the teacher told the kids that gender is fluid and then instructed the 6-year-olds to choose their own genders. That’s a pretty heavy topic for young kids who don’t even have a full sense of what “gender” is yet.

It’s perfectly sensible for parents to decide that it’s inappropriate for the teacher to meddle so deeply into their child’s personal identity.

Suppose your child’s teacher, under the guise of creating a welcoming classroom, instructed the 6-year-olds to choose their own ethnicities. You may choose to opt out of this absurd lesson. The Joneses, and now the Supreme Court, would fully support your decision.

Dan Gryboski, Broomfield

Embracing the final days of a loved one

Re: “The humane choice: Assisted suicide was a blessing for brother,” July 13 letter to the editor

Referring to your letter writer’s comment on Krista Kafer’s column on assisted suicide (July 6), Kafer may or may not have “real-life experience” with end-of-life suffering, but I have. My mother was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor at age 80 and given 6 months to live. With her cognitive state rapidly declining, along with bodily control, her doctor, with her and my father’s consent, chose to refrain from treatment that would only temporarily extend her life, providing only palliative care.

Assisted suicide could have ended her life at that point. Instead, the family was able to spend her last weeks with her, even as she faded from consciousness. I will always cherish the week we had at the end, where we were able to sing and talk to her, even as she lay in a coma. She was not in pain. She lasted barely three months from her diagnosis, a time which allowed us all to grow into acceptance of her coming departure.

The problem with a law, no matter how carefully constructed, is that it creates expectations. Kafer made this point. Ironically, the law ultimately takes away the freedom to choose life, even as it purports to allow for choice.

There are other options. Hospice allows a terminal patient to die naturally without artificially extending life, without lingering in a cruel and inhumane vegetative state. This option is open to all and requires no legal sanction.

Frances Rossi, Denver

This is the hill to do battle on?

Re: “I support Trump, Musk and Gulf of Mexico,” July 11 letter to the editor

A letter writer declares her support of President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. So she apparently supports reducing health care for the poor and disabled (Medicaid cuts), reducing taxes on the rich, cutting federal support for science, sending people to foreign prisons without due process, elimination of foreign aid (so China can fill the gap), expanding production and use of coal and oil (not clean energy), bullying esteemed universities and law firms, cutting National Park staff, and the general dismantling of federal programs that serve the public. But with great courage, she cites her opposition to one of the most consequential of Trump’s proposals — renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. It’s a good thing she is not running for Congress, because that opposition would surely prompt Trump to destroy her candidacy.

David Wolf, Lakewood

The mayor should focus on the mundane

Re: “Big swings, mixed results,” July 13 news story

It is good to know that Mayor Mike Johnston recognizes he is a failed poet. Now, he needs to recognize he is a failing mayor. While he sits around and dreams up the best adjective to use for his next tax and spend scheme or grandiose project (thanks for pointing out that “vibrant” is his favorite), like a professional women’s soccer stadium or a new Broncos playground, the mundane, day-to-day tasks of running a city fall by the wayside.

More and more unencumbered thugs brazenly shoplift in broad daylight. According to Denver Police Department patrol officers they are to overlook expired license plates because pulling them over could be construed as racism. The officers will go on to explain that those very vehicles are the ones most likely to harbor people with outstanding warrants as well as drugs, not to mention forfeiting hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in revenue that citations and fines for these and other “minor” violations would generate. Abandoned vehicles sit on streets for weeks or months at a time, creating potential biohazards as they reek of meth.

And, most recently, major streets in Denver have become muffler-free drag strips.

Real mayors take care of the not-so-glamorous business of keeping a city safe and clean, not dreaming up the next pie-in-the-sky phrase. I’m hoping a strong candidate or candidates will step up and take this guy on in the next couple of years. He is a poster boy for why so many Americans have become disgruntled with Democrats and view them as elitist dreamers, not doers.

Matt Bergles, Denver

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Updated July 22, 2025 at 1:30 p.m. Due to an editor’s error, a letter contained the incorrect details from the lawsuit against the Boulder Valley School District. The Jones family wrote for The Denver Post that the teachers were directly instructing children on gender fluidity. The editor changed the letter to reflect the facts in a different federal lawsuit, Mahmound v. Taylor.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Once, I defended a Montana man charged with violating the Endangered Species Act for killing a grizzly bear in self-defense. Attacked while guarding his sheep, he wounded and later killed the bear. Federal lawyers prosecuted him for eight years seeking a $5,000 fine, but he never worried about the $225,000 in legal fees; my representation was pro bono.

After his exoneration, I read of a Wyoming hunter who, charged by a grizzly, put down his rifle and sought to repel the attack with bear spray. He was badly mauled and saved only because his hunting partner shot the grizzly dead. Later, I telephoned and asked why he had not used his rifle.

“I’d hear about your Montana client,” he replied, “and I did not want the feds coming after me.”

That hunter came to mind when I read about a Westminster woman whose case is now before the Colorado Supreme Court. In 2020, at the age of 72 and after 16 years clerking for Circle K Stores, she was discharged for her response when a customer, armed with two knives, demanded free cigarettes and stepped behind the counter toward her.

Circle K Stores said she violated its “Confront and Chase Policy.” Mary Ann Moreno says she was fired for defending herself when she feared death or serious bodily injury and sued in state court for wrongful discharge.  After her suit was removed, by her employer, to federal court, but before the factual issue of why she was terminated was submitted to a jury, she sought an opinion from the Colorado Supreme Court.

Colorado, like most states, recognizes the common-law doctrine of at-will employment, which provides employees may be terminated for any reason or no reason whatsoever.  One exception includes discharges contrary to the public interest, such as exercising a legally protected right. Of concern to Moreno is whether self-defense is a public interest exception in Colorado. Her request that the federal district court certify that question to Colorado’s highest court was denied; but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed. Subsequently, the federal district court certified the question, which, on May 19, the Colorado Supreme Court accepted; briefings began this week.

A ruling from neighboring Utah foreshadows a possible outcome.

In 2015, in response to a certification from a Utah federal district court in a wrongful termination case akin to that of Moreno–a purported violation of the employer’s shoplifter policy—Utah’s Supreme Court recognized the self-defense exception:  (1) “[T]he right of self-defense is enshrined” in Utah’s Constitution, statutes, and common law decision. (2) Self-defense “protects human life and deters crime, conferring substantial benefits on the public.” (3) “[T]he right of self-defense outweighs an employer‘s countervailing interests” if an employee, facing “imminent threat of serious bodily injury,” reasonably believes force is necessary and cannot withdraw.

Like Utah, Colorado’s Constitution enshrines, as the “Inalienable rights” of “all persons,” that of “defending their lives and liberties … and of seeking and obtaining their safety … .”

Thus, both embrace John Locke’s view that the right of self-defense is “inalienable” because it is “a natural right” and is “self-evident.”  Moreover, the common law of both states is based upon the English common law, which, with its castle doctrine in the 17th Century, recognized the right of self-defense.

Today, Utah and Colorado have codified, or recognized by court rulings, the castle doctrine (right to use deadly force in one’s home), stand your ground (no duty to flee), and the right to defend others when facing death or serious bodily injury.  Thus, Ms. Moreno should prevail.

What will Ms. Moreno’s employer–the nation’s largest company-owned convenience store chain, with locations in 48 states—argue when it files its brief next month?  It should defend vigorously its current policy but eschew any desire to discharge employees for protecting their lives.

After all, citizens facing the threat of death or serious bodily harm, whether from four or two legged animals, have better things to worry about than whether their actions can get them sued or fired.

William Perry Pendley, a Wyoming attorney and Colorado-based, public-interest lawyer for three decades with victories at the Supreme Court of the United States, served in the Reagan administration and led the Bureau of Land Management for President Trump.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

False hope from the Epstein battle

Re: “Trump slams his supporters over Epstein ‘hoax’,” July 17 news story

If there’s one thing everyone ought to know by now, it’s that President Donald Trump never suffers for his infidelities and other misconduct. There’s no doubt in my mind that Elon Musk is orchestrating the current coup on the right. That’s fine, and it’s entertaining to see allies, insiders, and loyalists throw fits at Trump.

We should not delude ourselves, however, about whether these detractors will fall right back in line when it counts. They will, like they always do. They just approved his omnibus budget weeks ago.

Besides, no one likes Vice President JD Vance. No one wants Vance as president. Not even Trump supporters.

What we should expect is that the Epstein files will be redacted and released. Trump will carry on being a horrible president. He will probably fire several people after this blows over.

Nate Craig, Boulder

Government leaders need to get off wrong side of history and gain new perspective

In the book “Mark Twain” by Ron Chernow, I found the perfect explanation for why many people conformed to “the terrifying power of the environment to shape and distort human behavior.”  He was referencing the justification of slavery by so many otherwise good people, including clergy, but it explains so much more.

I grew up in the 1940s and ’50s in what is now referred to as a “red state.” And I must admit that I was a racist, believing that whites were intellectually superior to Blacks. My parents didn’t use racial slurs and were kind, but they erroneously judged Black people harshly. Sadly, that was more liberal than many locals felt.

I was an adult when I moved to a more neutral environment and was gradually exposed to reality.

But this is not about racism per se. It is about sequestered groups and communities that seldom are exposed to other views of the world.

That Chernow quote is the best explanation I’ve found to understand how good, kind people can accept the travesties taking place.

Yes, immigration is broken, but we turned our heads for years and took advantage of the workers. Send back the criminals and the more recent arrivals, but have empathy for those who have been here for years, raising families, serving the communities, and often serving in the military.

We have known there has been waste in all government departments for decades. It must be corrected — but not with a chainsaw and mindless, inhuman, vindictive overkill.

Congress and other branches of government must be more informed by their awakened constituents than they fear the president.

David L King, Erie

Wasting life-saving food supply

Do Trump supporters have limits? I had to wonder this when I read in The Atlantic that the Trump administration will incinerate 500 tons of high-energy biscuits. These are emergency rations that could feed 1.5 million malnourished children for a week. They were intended for distribution in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but the elimination of the USAID funding (and the whole program!) means this $800,000 stockpile will expire and is slated to be incinerated.

Is this the American way? Are there no limits to what Trump fans will put up with in their allegiance to him? I can’t believe Republican congressmen are so fearful of being primaried that they put up with these daily outrages.

I would think any decent person would be as repulsed by this as I am. Yet it’s just another day for this administration. I pray for the day when the rats will leave the sinking ship.

Chris Mech, Gypsum

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

In early 2024, Historic Denver learned of the State’s intention to build a bridge symbolically connecting the State land of the Capitol grounds with City-owned Civic Center, “bridging City and State,” according to the concept document. The two levels of government would be symbolically connected as the centerpiece of Colorado’s 150th and America’s 250th birthdays. This symbolism is admirable, but we could not see how it would be brought to life by an elevated bridge without destroying the quiet dignity of Civic Center, the only National Historic Landmark within Denver limits.

Nevertheless, the concept document provided reassurance: “As the walkway traverses the Civic Center National Historic Landmark, it will adhere to specific design guidelines for the state of Colorado, state Historic Preservation Commission, the National Park Service, and the Denver Landmark Commission.”

Fast forward 18 months and the concept document has been translated into something that looks quite appropriate in the Winter Olympics but wildly out of place in front of the state Capitol. The national, state, and local design guidelines have been steamrollered – or perhaps shredded by the metaphorical bobsled hurtling down its track. The meandering layout has been created by an out-of-state firm, leading many to question why Colorado’s birthday is being celebrated by a project designed in Illinois.

The City of Denver was not keen, so the bridge only connects state land with state land, losing the original symbolism. Public reaction has been fierce and Historic Denver’s own petition of opposition has received over 2,000 responses. In the face of criticism about the clear lack of purpose, the bridge’s proponents pivoted to labor the need for wheelchair accessibility. Yet, accessibility is not mentioned once in the original concept document. To compound matters, the only accessibility advocate to publicly support the project retracted his views and stated he felt “used.” The State had a budget deficit prior to the passing of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” in D.C. and the governor has highlighted that this will make the situation worse. Surely now is the time to exercise financial restraint.

In response to all this, the Governor’s Office is finally asking for public feedback – but for only one week. We encourage the public to vote “no” in the first question, which asks whether Colorado should build a walkway at the state Capitol.

Historic Denver has a track record in reconciling the historic past with a vibrant present and future. We support a city initiative to rehabilitate the Greek Theater just across the park from the proposed bridge. We agree with the Governor’s Office about the importance of the 2026 anniversaries and the merits of drawing upon our state’s art and culture to celebrate this unique moment – after all, the creative industries contribute more to Colorado’s economy than the ski industry. However, we firmly believe that these objectives can be accomplished at ground level without the need for an elevated walkway.

A largely designed and broadly supported initiative already exists in Denver – the 5280 Trail.

Conceived in 2017 and promoted by the Downtown Denver Partnership and the City and County of Denver, the trail aims to “link neighborhoods and connect people by reimagining underutilized streets into the essential Downtown experience, uniting urban life with Colorado’s outdoor culture.” The route passes state Capitol grounds, running down Sherman Street.

What better way to achieve the original concept of the pedestrian bridge, to symbolically link city and state, than by integrating the story of Colorado into the 5280 Trail adjacent to the state Capitol.

The trail then continues its journey through Denver, linking several of the city’s vibrant neighborhoods. The original concept of the bridge remains both admirable and achievable, but instead of giving up on our streets and pushing people into the sky, let’s celebrate street-level vitality and invest in the 5280 Trail.

Historic Denver and our state-wide partners at Colorado Preservation Inc. stand together in opposition to the pedestrian bridge.

John Deffenbaugh is the president and CEO of Historic Denver.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Aurora City Council and Mayor Mike Coffman made the right decision on Monday not to ask voters for pay raises, but the question before them lingers over many growing cities across the state and deserves an honest answer and assessment.

We know that many city council members in Aurora, one of the nation’s 51 largest cities, are working far more than a part-time job representing thousands of constituents across the sprawling municipality. For many Aurora residents who would consider running, the part-time salary of $22,000 makes it impossible to do the job well because holding a second job would be a necessity. Conditions are even worse in Colorado Springs, where city council members still earn what is essentially a $6,250 stipend, and in Greeley, where voters recently rejected a pay raise, keeping the salary at $12,600.

We want public office to be open to everyone, not only to the independently wealthy.

Still, we applaud the Aurora mayor and city council members for rejecting this particular pay package.

Pay raises must be commiserate with work expectations.

Voters in these cities should be asked two questions at the same time: should the job description for their city councils change to full-time with more frequent meetings and more expectations, and should the pay be increased to go along with those new hours?

City Manager Jason Batchelor, who requested the raises for his bosses, is right that the job overseeing one of the nation’s largest cities is no longer part-time, but the City Charter must change first to make the positions full-time before salaries jump from $22,700 to $75,000 for council members.

There are many issues with Aurora’s City Charter – particularly how it handles discipline, hiring and firing in the police department – and we don’t think the city should be afraid of asking voters to amend the document. In an election in 2023, voters approved several fixes to the charter.

We know many city council members work more than just the two public meetings a month, but we are also certain that many do not. The pay increase must be commiserate with an official increase of hours worked. Even elected officials need accountability. If the charter changes and council members are working a full-time job every week then we think an annual salary of $75,000 would help attract qualified and committed candidates without attracting people who are in it for the money.

As for the mayor’s salary, which would have increase from $98,500 to $150,000 annually, we have to agree with Mayor Mike Coffman that it is inappropriate.

Coffman, perhaps one of Colorado’s most honest and forthright politicians, pledged to oppose putting the measure on the ballot unless his salary increase was removed from the proposal.

“Public service is, by itself, supposed to be a sacrifice,” Coffman said.

Amen.

We appreciate the selfless people who step into the limelight to serve their community, often taking on public scrutiny and uncomfortable situations in addition to late-night meetings and campaigning. We agree that making the job full-time will generate more economically diverse candidates who can hold the position without trying to also hold a full-time job, something that today is hard to do with any kind of position that doesn’t have extreme flexibility.

The last thing we want is for public office to only be available to the affluent.

But, in the case of the mayor, we think $98,500 is a full-time salary that a person in Aurora could live on without having to maintain a second job.

We’d also like to point out that in many of these cities, elected officials are already getting cost-of-living increases annually.

People, whether elected or at-will, should be paid for the work they do. These cities are booming, and we no longer think part-time council work is sufficient to meet the needs of the community. Once the roles change, their salary should increase as well. But not before.

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

When I served on the Greeley-Evans School Board, I saw the best of our community. I saw city officials, county commissioners, chamber members, business leaders, residents, and school board members come together around visions and ideas.

At the time, we were looking for ways to invest in our town’s future. Together, we traveled to Kalamazoo, Michigan, to learn about the Kalamazoo Promise and find out how we could give every child a college scholarship upon high school graduation.

We learned that to generate funds for their ambitious project, Kalamazoo had built a downtown hotel surrounded by supporting businesses. We spoke to local leaders and learned from their project, and then adapted Kalamazoo’s success right here at home — implementing G Town Promise. We passed a bond issue and a mill levy override. We rebuilt Greeley West and completed long-overdue improvements. I was — and still am — so proud of my community and our commitment.

This is why I find the current Cascadia Project and how our local elected officials are approaching it so concerning.

Greeley’s government has been pushing full steam ahead on a $1.1 billion hockey stadium project, with taxpayers footing the bill. Unlike the Kalamazoo Promise, Cascadia has no guarantee of investment in our local people or community. The hockey team is privately owned, and its financials are unknown. Our local town council has not asked Martin Lind, the team’s owner, to make any investment or agree to any terms to stay in the area or give any benefit back to our town. Unlike the public-private partnerships we created with the Kalamazoo Promise, Cascadia appears to be a taxpayer-funded public giveaway to a private CEO.

Our elected officials have not done due diligence to find out why Lind’s current stadium in Loveland is not working out. As far as we know, they haven’t traveled to Larimer County – far closer than Kalamazoo – to learn from them or get the answers to the numerous questions that have been raised about the Cascadia Project. At recent town council meetings, Greeley citizens have had many questions. Citizens have asked how much water this massive facility would need, if the town will need to invest in roads to handle traffic, or if school district boundaries will be altered. Answers are few and far between.

Bringing community together is hard work. When I served on the school board, we disagreed on some things, but we shared a goal to make Greeley better for our residents. Together, we turned District 6 (which I represented) around and developed internships and opportunities for kids.

The focus of our town’s leadership today appears to be less about investing in the people of Greeley and more about landing the Cascadia. Nonetheless, community members have repeatedly been showing up to question this move, to challenge the process, and to ask about both spending and community benefits.

It is not wrong for community members to ask how they will benefit from the Cascadia Project — in fact, it is right. After all, it is our money that will be footing this enormous bill, and our government needs to get us the best deal. We are asking if Greeley residents and businesses will beneift with jobs and contracts from the Cascadia Project; if Greeley residents (especially those who are low or middle income) will be helped with affording access to Cascadia; and if a Community Benefits Agreement could help ensure Greeley residents are truly at the table as decision about this project are made.

It is the job of an elected official to listen to the community, but that is not what residents are experiencing in Greeley. The city appears to only listen to Lind, who does not live here. I’m shocked at the number of unanswered questions around the project, the lack of transparency, and the disregard for community input. I’m surprised by the partnership with a for-profit entity that does not rise to the level of community commitment that I have previously experienced in our town.

Rhonda Solis is a long-time Greeley resident and former District 6 school board member and State Board of Education member representing Congressional District 8. 

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Think back to your own school days. How much learning, friendship, and fun would have been lost if you had been allowed to bring a small television set to school and watch it all day long, even at lunch and recess? It may seem like an absurd question — a television set? at school? — but it is precisely the reality that students today are experiencing.

Since the early 2010s, U.S. middle and high schools have seen a startling increase in mental illness and psychological suffering among their students. The acceptance of smartphones in schools has fueled cyberbullying, conflict among students, and had a cumulative, enduring, and deleterious effect on adolescents’ abilities to focus and apply themselves. This is especially harrowing as nearly half of American teens say that they are online “almost constantly.”

This isn’t just about mental health and school safety. Globally, test scores have been dropping since 2012. Earlier this year, new data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress showed that reading and math scores in the U.S. have dropped to their lowest levels in decades.

Now Colorado school leaders have a chance to do something that can truly help kids.

This spring, Gov. Jared Polis signed House Bill 1135 into law, requiring schools to develop and implement a policy on student phone use during the school day. It’s a step forward — and it couldn’t come at a more urgent time. School leaders are beginning to shape those policies now, with an implementation deadline less than a year away.

Colorado, like many jurisdictions in the U.S., is leaving the specifics to local districts. This means that policies could range from “put phones in your backpacks during instruction time” to “bell-to-bell phone-free campuses.”  While HB 1135 is certainly a step in the right direction, I urge Colorado school districts to go beyond partial limits and adopt bell-to-bell phone-free school policies like Boulder Valley School District has already done. Limiting phone use only during instructional time still allows for students to rush to their phones between classes, at lunch, and during recess, costing them valuable opportunities to connect with one another face-to-face.

Moreover, research from the National Education Association found that 73% of teachers in schools that allow phone use BETWEEN classes report that phones are disruptive DURING class. In contrast, of the several policies examined, only the phone-free or “away for the day” policy produced good results: only 28% of teachers in such schools said that phones were disruptive during their classes. It’s only when students have 6-7 hours away from their phones that they fully turn to each other and to their teachers. Otherwise, teachers will continue to be responsible for enforcing phone policies when students come back from breaks, which is a role they are eager to relinquish.

In a divided country and a world of diverse nations, we have seen education policy on this subject move at astonishing speeds elsewhere. Why? Because parents and teachers around the world have seen the damage done to students’ attention, education, safety, and mental health when they spend much of the school day on their phones texting, scrolling and posting on social media, watching videos, and playing video games.

A 2024 survey of school principals showed that they were similarly alarmed by the effect of smartphones on students, with 88% stating that they were making children tired and distracted, and 85% believing it was amplifying violence and bullying in schools. No wonder that, in 2023, a major Unesco report considered the overwhelming evidence that excessive phone use was correlated with lower school performance and poorer mental health and called for the ban of smartphones from schools.

Walk around most school hallways today and take in the silence, notice the eeriness. In contrast, whenever schools adopt a bell-to-bell policy the reports from teachers and administrators are always the same: “we hear laughter in the hallways again.” Also, bullying, disciplinary problems, and absenteeism decline. School becomes more fun.

Colorado has more than 880,000 public school students. Imagine the impact if, over the next year, districts committed to bringing conversation and laughter back to their schools’ hallways.

Social media is designed to steal the attention of kids and teens who are at pivotal stages of their mental development. Our kids are owed their attention back. Our kids deserve the learning, friendship, and fun that we recall from our own schooling experiences. And, for now, the one place where we can truly safeguard that is schools. We need to give our kids a break from the noise and the drama. We need to and Colorado can.

Jonathan Haidt is a social psychologist and the author of The Anxious Generation. 

Government leaders need to get off wrong side of history and gain new perspective

In the book “Mark Twain” by Ron Chernow, I found the perfect explanation for why many people conformed to “the terrifying power of the environment to shape and distort human behavior.”  He was referencing the justification of slavery by so many otherwise good people, including clergy, but it explains so much more.

I grew up in the 1940s and ’50s in what is now referred to as a “red state.” And I must admit that I was a racist, believing that whites were intellectually superior to Blacks. My parents didn’t use racial slurs and were kind, but they erroneously judged Black people harshly. Sadly, that was more liberal than many locals felt.

I was an adult when I moved to a more neutral environment and was gradually exposed to reality.

But this is not about racism per se. It is about sequestered groups and communities that seldom are exposed to other views of the world.

That Chernow quote is the best explanation I’ve found to understand how good, kind people can accept the travesties taking place.

Yes, immigration is broken, but we turned our heads for years and took advantage of the workers. Send back the criminals and the more recent arrivals, but have empathy for those who have been here for years, raising families, serving the communities, and often serving in the military.

We have known there has been waste in all government departments for decades. It must be corrected — but not with a chainsaw and mindless, inhuman, vindictive overkill.

Congress and other branches of government must be more informed by their awakened constituents than they fear the president.

David L King, Erie

Reconsider red-light cameras for safety

I recently traveled to Miami, and my GPS device warned me of red light cameras at traffic lights while I was driving. It turns out that many lights have cameras (at least in Miami Beach, where I was staying). They actually work as cars stop before the light turns red, rather than racing through as we often see here.

Why? Because drivers know a camera will catch them if they don’t stop. I would like to see more of those here, and think the accidents they help prevent outweigh the arguments that these cameras are a threat to civil liberties.

Thomas H. Brady, Wheat Ridge

Presidential struggles with truth-telling

Those of us of a certain age grew accustomed to presidential administrations’ intentional struggles with the truth a long time ago —  LBJ’s falsehoods about Vietnam; Nixon’s about Watergate and related matters; Reagan’s about Iran-Contra; Clinton’s about Monica Lewinsky; W. Bush’s non-existent “weapons of mass destruction”; and, Biden’s… let’s just say his memory about stories he told failed him. But Trump takes the cake, hands down.

Fact-checkers have largely given up due to the huge volume of falsehoods. So please understand we want to see the receipts on “obliteration versus heavy damage” and Iran spiriting away the enriched uranium prior to the bombing.

Public trust is built heavily on transparency and truth, so don’t be so surprised about the lack of trust in our elected officials and stop attacking journalists who are trying to get the truth.

John W. Thomas, Fort Collins

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.