Johnston delivers a moral victory for Denver
Re: “Johnston stays even-keeled during congressional hearing,” March 6 news story
Kudos to Mayor Mike Johnston for his testimony to the House Oversight Committee, where he stated that Denver’s decision to provide shelter to immigrants bussed here from Texas was based on deep moral values. Kudos as well for being a man of faith, quoting the Bible to a Congress containing many fundamentalist legislators. Denver’s willingness to help people in need stands in stark contrast to the lack of a moral compass in many of the elected, appointed and non-elected individuals claiming to lead our country.
Bob Bassett, Denver
Do we really need more open space in Lakewood?
As a resident of Lakewood and a supporter of new housing to meet the needs of our young working families, as well as someone who often walks Lakewoods many parks, I thought I would look at and compare our available open space to our neighboring cities.
Here are the per-person numbers of the amount of open space per-person in each city based on each city’s total acres of open space and its population: Lakewood 2,067 sq.ft.; Littleton 1,372 sq.ft.; Arvada 1,220 sq.ft.; Aurora 882 sq.ft.; City of Denver 379 sq.ft.
As you can see, Lakewood already has a much larger percentage of open space per capita than any of its neighboring cities. In fact, Lakewood could grow its population by a large percentage and still have more open space per capita than its neighboring cities.
Is there really a need for more open space in Lakewood? Or are those leading that battle for more open space just an anti-growth, anti-density coalition wanting to prevent new housing opportunities for new families; the creation of new construction, retail, and service jobs that come with and follow new residential developments; the resulting larger property tax base new residential developments bring, and a more vibrant economy fueled by new residences, new residents, new jobs, and a larger tax base? Just look at the numbers.
Louis Kolker, Lakewood
Making the case against urban sprawl
Re: “Denser housing vs. the ‘burbs,” March 4 news story
Density is not evil, but urban sprawl is. Urban sprawl promotes the consumption of open space, demands the use of the car for everything, consumes the natural habitat, and creates the ideal setting for wildfires. If we are to continue to promote economic growth, we need to promote alternatives to sprawl, such as transit-oriented development.
Concentrated urban living promotes neighborhood, convenience and more available open space for everyone to enjoy. And there is ample evidence that density does not increase crime per capita. Rather, density can reduce crime by putting more eyes on the street.
Richard von Luhrte, Denver
Let’s get speeding, reckless traffic under control
I try to avoid sarcasm, but this is a fair question: Is there any traffic violation enforcement in Denver? I’m setting aside the failure to require motorists to have plates and up-to-date registration of vehicles. I’m speaking of unticketed reckless driving.
One hardly has to go 10 blocks before seeing motorists driving 20 miles over the limit, running stoplights and signs, and weaving in and out of traffic dangerously. Where is the enforcement? As scarce as hens’ teeth.
One result is a soaring number of accidents and even injuries, which in turn drives insurance costs — for all of us — sky high. Granted, there are other drivers of those rates, but as to accidents alone, one need only look at the number of accident lawyer billboards to know insurance costs are ballooning. Hiring more traffic officers should be a priority. There are many traffic control devices, monitors and signs. Employ them — widely.
Bruce Smith, Denver
How about a cutoff point for Social Security benefits?
It’s not uncommon for an individual to receive more money in Social Security benefits than they contributed in their working life. So how about a new rule: If you’ve received 25% more than you’ve contributed and your passive income (dividends, interest, rental income, etc) is in excess of $200,000, you are immediately cut off.
This is an easy argument to make and would allow the trust fund additional years of solvency.
Jim Donovan, 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.