Letters: Eagle Co. open space funds misused | VailDaily.com

Letters: Eagle Co. open space funds misused

Compiled by Vail Daily staff
Vail CO, Colorado

Not another Munich

To appease the Arab terrorists, the Bush administration has exerted enormous pressure on Israel to release hundreds of Palestinian Arabs caught in the act of killing Jews. To appease the Arab racists who deny Israel’s undeniable biblical and historic bond to Jerusalem, the administration has demanded that Israel surrender the Temple Mount to Arab sovereignty. In Annapolis, the administration is reported to be planning to coerce even more dangerous concessions from Israel.

The president should end the program of appeasement and use the program he championed when he ran for office. He promised the American people that if the Palestinian Arabs would not abandon terror, he would abandon his support for a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan River. On June 24, 2002 he explicitly said: “A Palestinian state will never be created by terror.”

It is time for him to redeem that pledge. In the upcoming meeting in Annapolis, the president should stop putting pressure on Israel to surrender to Palestinian Arab terror. He should not turn “Annapolis 2007” into “Munich 1938” by replicating the betrayals of Neville Chamberlain in the administration’s vain attempt to appease modern-day Arab terror.

Instead, use the Annapolis meeting to advance the cause of freedom, decency and democracy. Use the opportunity Annapolis affords to insist before the entire world that there will be no American support for any Palestinian Arab entity as long as a single rocket is fired from Gaza towards Israel.

Furthermore, he should use the forum of Annapolis to boldly proclaim that he fully supports Israel’s historical and biblical rights in Jerusalem, and that as long as he is president, there will be no American support for any Palestinian Arab entity that does not similarly acknowledge that all of Jerusalem ” including the entire Temple Mount ” is Israel’s eternal and indivisible capital.

Arthur Kittay


Open space’s purpose

I find it amusing that the Vail Daily, which calls itself the voice of Eagle County, continues to defend public welfare (i.e. using our tax dollar) given to former Eagle County Commissioner Bud Gates. This welfare was used so a former county commissioner can continue to live in his house on more than 700 acres. Apparently there is a disconnect between the voice of the county and the citizens of the county.

This welfare is in the name of open space. The definition of open is “not closed or locked, allowing people or things to pass freely”. The definition of space is “an area set apart or available” or “the area between the left ear lobe and right ear lobe”.

I do not believe that the citizens of Eagle County voted to be taxed to preserve land that would not be accessible. There are many instances where open space designation in Colorado are designed for walking trails, bike paths, parks, river access, fishing, dog runs, etc. From what I understand the public will not be allowed to access the former county commissioner’s property, which is now bought by our tax dollar. This is wrong.

I’m sorry for the financial plight that the former county commissioner is in. I think many of us have been in difficult financial situations and had to make hard decisions we would not have liked to have made.

Gates laments how the valley has been changed and not for the better. He was in power when many of the golf courses were approved for the few who could afford them. He was in power when gated communities were approved where once deer and elk grazed. He was in power when affordable housing areas could have been set aside (not a bogus, pay-in-lieu of deal). He was in power when projects were approved causing the road congestion and air pollution we are dealing with now. He was in power when open space along the Eagle River and the valley could have been preserved.

Is it rational or sensible policy to use public funds to deny public access? Many citizens of Eagle County are not opposed to being taxed in order to preserve open space. We just believe that if you use our tax dollars, we should have access, not for someone to live in his house on 740 acres.

Michael Gross


Support Local Journalism

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User