Letters: Menconi recall justified
Vail CO, Colorado
Menconi recall justified
Don Roger’s column, questioning our motives for the recall attempt of Commissioner Arn Menconi, is construed as a personal attack against those of us who are following the democratic process. Our laws allow us to recall elected public servants if we choose to. Our laws do not even require criminal actions by public servants to warrant their removal from office. You criticized us for attempting to follow our recall laws. We have not noticed anyone trying to terminate them.
Mr. Rogers, it’s poor speculation on your part to guess what our motives are. You chose to personalize the attack against us and mislabel us. Can’t we just debate the issue of whether Mr. Menconi should be removed, without personal attacks on we, the people, that disagree with you?
Make no mistake about it, our fast growing support for Mr. Menconi’s recall is tripartisan, Democrats, Republicans and independents.
Frankly, many people have their own reasons to remove Mr. Menconi, and express them to me daily. There are many reasons to recall Mr. Menconi. We may or may not decide to disclose all of them to you.
Mr. Rogers, you have supported Mr. Menconi in two elections. Therefore, we are also reluctant to disclose our strategy and recall efforts with you. Why would we do that, when you continue to protect him? The public realizes that your reputation is at stake if he is recalled. We believe that you cannot bring yourself to admit you were wrong to endorse him twice, in the first place.
There is also reason to believe that you have been aware of more serious allegations against Mr. Menconi, and have chosen not to disclose them to your readers. Why?
Mr. Rogers, twice your paper has erroneously written that Mr. Menconi was against sending the second home rule election to the voters, at taxpayer costs of $30,000 per election. This was just six months after the voters turned the first proposal down. Mr. Menconi, in fact, voted for this second home rule election at a special Friday county commissioner meeting. Isn’t this public record? Please have the Daily write a correction on those erroneous writings and admit that Mr. Menconi supported both home rule elections with his votes.
You suggest that maybe we should be recalling all three commissioners. We are not anarchists. We believe in responsible government. A successful recall of Mr. Menconi sends this message to the remaining commissioners. We believe new blood, from any political party, would be better than what we have now with Mr. Menconi.
As to your final comment in your viewpoint column, you stated that we should “bring it on.” Be careful what you wish for. Remember, George W. Bush made this statement. Look where it got him.
The Committee to
Recall Arn Menconi
Editor’s note: The county commissioners were obligated by law to put the home rule charter on the election ballot for the voters to decide. Commissioners Fisher and Runyon supported the voters’ passage of the charter. Menconi did not. Menconi was against the passage and implementation of the home rule charter, preferring the current system.
Who are the loonies?
Loved your blog, but who are these “loonies on the far left” you are talking about?
It’s nice to see Republicans finally coming to their senses and speaking the truth ” which they are capable of doing with great clarity once they get past their parents’ reflexive hatred of the Democrats ” but they almost always dilute their mea culpas with some reference or other to the far left that’s taking over the Democratic party.
Are you talking about the “loonies” who want to fix health care? Or the tree-huggers who are concerned that the arctic tundra is becoming a muddy soup and releasing increasing quantities of methane gas, which holds atmospheric heat at 23 times the rate of CO2?
Or to the doomsayers who can see that we’ve burned up at least half of our oil in the last century or so, and that it isn’t going to take anywhere near that long to burn up the rest?
Who on earth are the “loonies on the far left?”
Road safety solutions
The move afloat by county officials to lower speed limits on Highway 6 and I-70 from Edwards to Eagle appears to be unfounded. The geometric design of these roads supports the speed limits as posted. There does not appear to be an unusually large number of traffic accidents in this long, unfettered stretch of highway, nor are there any conflict points introduced by interstate ramps. The Colorado Department of Transportation sets speed limits based on the 85th percentile rule, that is the speed at which 85 percent of drivers are traveling. A speed study of this stretch would clearly support keeping the limits at the current posting.
A better solution to alleviate safety concerns would be to widen the westbound off-ramp at Eagle to increase the carrying capacity of the ramp and reduce the backups onto I-70.