An alternative plan
Dear Editor:A majority of voters turned out to vote “no” on City Referendum 2C. According to the Daily News, our mayor then calls this majority “cowards” for not coming forward with an alternative plan. Helen goes on to say that the recycle center would not be a big priority for the council anyway. OK, so the majority of voters are cowardly because Helen doesn’t (want to?) remember our alternative plans and she makes it clear that hearing about alternative plans are not a priority for council anyway. Alternative plans were suggested throughout the campaign and in letters to the editor. First, plant some trees instead of spending $750,000 on an “Aspen-ized” shed to screen the recycle containers. Second, retain the existing drive-through layout with two entrances rather than closing one and making it a dead end, requiring a multipoint turn to get back out.Third, resolve the mud issue with some sort of environmentally friendly, but less muddy, road surface. Fourth, and this is new: Some of the rent money due the city from the Obermeyer development that can be spent only on the recycle center (who in the city signed off on that lease agreement?) could be invested long-term to fund a perpetual schedule for someone to tidy up the area a few hours each week. Bert MyrinAspen
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.