Vail Daily’s Wisdom from the Web
Vail, CO, Colorado
The Web comments following commentaries and stories at http://www.vaildaily.com can be interesting, even entertaining, as long as you don’t take them too personally. Some are wildly off-base, and some are dead-on. Almost none come from people who are willing to identify who they are, and so they lack the credibility that comes with being accountable. Still, these are citizens who care, and if a bit more caustically sometimes than necessary, they are indeed adding something to the greater community discussion. You can’t accuse these authors of apathy, that’s for sure. Here is a sampling:
Vail Daily’s view: Car-registration fees would be reliable revenue source
Vail Daily, we already pay enough in fees and taxes. If government did not have so much “pork” and pet projects, we would not even be considering this fee hike. They just need to tighten their belts on the pork and take care of the important business. Live within a budget like the rest of us!
Vail Daily’s view: Taxing motorists by mileage is a very bad idea
Participate in The Longevity Project
The Longevity Project is an annual campaign to help educate readers about what it takes to live a long, fulfilling life in our valley. This year Kevin shares his story of hope and celebration of life with his presentation Cracked, Not Broken as we explore the critical and relevant topic of mental health.
Our taxes provide plenty of revenue. It’s the state’s responsibility to prioritize its use. Perhaps we could get rid of other bureaucracies that are less important in times like these. The government would never “replace federal and state fuel taxes” because they never willingly relinquish any tax.
The idea behind this tax is to fill the gap and bring the miles driven tax to parity of the gas tax we already have. Miles driven will replace the federal and state fuel tax. In theory, you’d be paying the same amount. This tax would be used to continue collecting money for our roads and bridges from those fortunate enough to afford buying a hybrid and who now pay less taxes for fuel. We have to fund our roads in one way or another. What other ideas are out there for this?
Any new taxes are bad right now, period. Sure the roads are getting bad, but pretty soon no one will be driving anymore if these guys just keep killing jobs and opportunities.
Don Rogers: The tempest to come
This column was a plea for a discussion about the proposed Eagle River Station shopping center free of excoriating those with different views and how a referendum is the best way to make this decision in Eagle.
I would much rather people live with passion than a bunch of material crap purchased at Costco, Wal-Mart or the supposed anchor, Target. If Americans and Eagle were willing to step up and support their neighbors (even if slightly more expensive), consume less goods, live more with the Earth and simply not be so wasteful, we could thrive easily without monstrosities like Eagle River Station.
If there are some who are for ERS that feel personally attacked, I am sorry for that. However, I am not sorry that so many of us see a travesty before us and are trying to do whatever we can to prevent it from happening. We can do so much better as a community, as a society, than what Eagle River Station represents. No to ERS!
girl n the mtns
Girl, exactly. All the opposition like you and I (and many others) are trying to do is save our town from the same crap that happens all over the country ” destruction of landscape for the sake of the almighty dollar. ERS is so generic. The only thing that makes it different is that it will be a huge sprawl in a pasture with elk and horses that has defined the gateway to Eagle for hundreds of years; 42-foot-high buildings, acres and acres of pavement, lighting brighter than Costco times 20. That’s what makes ERS “different”!
We opposers to ERS value the beauty of raw land, we value small-town thinking (even though some of us are very progressive thinkers), and we value our neighbors who have businesses here. I am proud that I am taking a stand against an out-of-state developer whose only motive is to make money and leave. That is their prerogative, but ours is saving the place in which we live. Whose feelings are being hurt here?
My comments are too long, so be looking in the newspaper for a letter to the editor, but briefly: The supposed $2.5 million is based on a 95 percent occupancy, which is totally unrealistic. Good location? Yeah, at the gateway to Eagle. Urban sprawl ” great idea. More retail is not diversification of our economy and would be in direct competition with all existing businesses in Eagle. Why do you think more businesses aren’t coming in? Because they are waiting to see if ERS goes through, and then they won’t! How in the heck can 572,000 square feet of retail foster Eagle’s small-town community?
Vail Daily’s view: Need an outside consultant to explain Vail Valley to county commissioners?
As the president of an advertising agency, I agree and disagree with your commentary. It is, of course, ridiculous to pay $36,000 for a logo and slogan! It’s equally silly to think an effective logo and tagline can be secured by a community contest. Granted, anyone could have come up with what the Texas firm did, and we should be concerned at the price and quality of recommendations.
A typical agency, like mine, would have developed a logo and tagline for between $2,500 and $3,500, depending on the amount of research the client wanted. Choosing a local firm that can conduct local research negates the need for a huge budget.
But before we’re too tough on our elected officials, let’s consider their situation. If they hadn’t commissioned a qualified firm and just came up with a solution, they’d get blasted for not making an informed decision. They lose either way unless we give them the latitude to lead.
Eagle, thanks for your informed comments on what it should cost to purchase a logo and slogan. That is incredible, and I sure wish the commish folk would have hired your firm and saved the taxpayers.
However, I do disagree with your comment on the contest. I have personally done this, and the ideas that the locals came up with were fantastic, and I actually got the name for one of my businesses this way!
And it works up here because we have a lot of highly educated and successful second-home owners, locals, etc. It may not work just any ol’ where in the country, but it would have worked here. At least that has been my personal experience.
Bully! Bully! I couldn’t agree with you (Vail Daily Editorial Board) more. What was even more rich is that (Commissioner Sara) Fisher was quoted as saying that they may not even use the information that we paid for. The VD has it right. Instead of a study, why don’t we have a competition to rename the county commissioners? I’ll start with “Fumble, Stumble and Mumble.”
The commissioners might as well be lighting cigars with $100 bills. If this is the kind of leadership we can expect going forward, we’re in trouble.
If a slogan is needed, how about making it interactive while spreading money around here in the county? Have a contest. The winner (marketing types or firms up here) gets a free ski pass and a press release. They also get the opportunity to present an idea that would increase tourism but not cost the county any money. If the idea is accepted, they get the contract.
The challenge is to come up with something that wouldn’t cost the county any money.
Because any dumba– can come up with ideas that cost money but don’t make any.
Create revenue for the winning idea (read: food on table) while increasing business ” all without costing the county a dime.
… When, in the last eight years of these commissioners, have they ever shown even an inkling of interest in “economic development and boosting tourism”? From my view, Sara, Arn and Peter and Bruce (who they inexplicably fired) have developed such a full-on assault on business and development opportunities in the county that it is downright obscene.
Will this study change Peter’s mind that second-home owners are pure evil? Will this study suddenly jolt the commissioners into action and start actually encouraging businesses to locate here? I think not.
Vail Daily’s view: Heavy snow today, but best prepare for a higher snowline tomorrow
Seems like all agree … this kind of crap contains no science whatsoever. Seems like these so-called “professors” get all the attention and have little or no facts behind their assertions.
Does anyone remember the winters in the late ’70s? Very little to no snowfall ” it was called a drought! Nowadays, there is a political agenda for this BS. Can’t believe folks like this still have jobs. Can’t believe I actually read the entire article. …
Apparently, warm weather means global warming. Cold weather is just a blip on the radar. In the words of John McEnroe, “You cannot be serious!”
I only wish they were right because it’s been too cold and snowy here this winter, and I’m tired of it! And all the earth huggers I know don’t recycle, so obviously they don’t believe their own hogwash.
Fear sells even free newspapers.
What a waste of space in the Daily. A cartoon of Chicken LIttle would be more appropriate. Not even one of the top 100 concerns for anyone in the valley. And that is even if geography professors can now somehow see the future. What BTW is the basis for this “report”? Oh, that would require some investigation and questioning.