Su’s election guide, part II |

Su’s election guide, part II

Su Lum

I am delighted to report that I agree 100 percent with The Aspen Times’ editorial endorsements on the state amendments and referendums, leaving me more space for other questions. Check out the Oct. 11 and Oct. 13 back issues in the front office for details. Here is the wrap-up:Amendment 38, petitions, NO; 39, school spending, NO; 40, term limits for judges, NO; 41, government standards of conduct, YES; 42, minimum wage, YES; 43, marriage only between man and woman, NO; 44, marijuana, YES.Referendum E, tax reduction for veterans, NO; F, recall deadlines, YES; G, obsolete provisions, YES; H, tax deductions for illegal alien wages, YES; I, rights for domestic partners (the Times left this one out, but I know they would also say YES); J, school spending, NO; K, lawsuits against federal government, NO.County Referendum 1A, a dedicated property tax for healthy community fund: YES.This is a slight increase to the tax we already approved, and it all goes to good causes such as senior programs, hospice care, domestic abuse, mental health and support services. This will win in a walk. YES.County Referendum 1B, open space and trails. With NO INCREASE IN TAXES, this extends by 10 years the funds we have already approved, making it easier for this group to get bonding for future land purchases. Another win in a walk. YES.City Referendum 2B, an increased sales tax to fund parking and transportation. Costs of gas and wages have the city facing a shortfall and looking into draconian measures such as extending paid parking into the residential areas and eliminating some of our free bus services. There is no screaming emergency to pass this, as the city will have two more elections (May and November) to put it to us again, preferably with more notice and information. I like that it’s a sales tax where everyone pays rather than socking it to the property owners, including me, so I’m leaning towards YES lest it come back as a property tax, though god knows the city seems to be a bottomless money pit.City Referendum 2C – recycling center. Originally the opposing group, which seems to consist of Toni Kronberg and a handful of property owners in Oklahoma Flats, was vehemently opposed to the location of the present recycling center. Now their tune has changed (one wonders why) to approving the site but opposing the design of the proposed structures, wanting trees and berms.The present recycling center is a mess and an eyesore; the proposed structures are sensitively designed, and I think, will be a great improvement. The opponents’ claims about the size and impact of the shelters and their cost are greatly exaggerated.The ballot question’s wording is somewhat confusing, but if you’re in favor of the proposed new recycling center, vote YES. I will.Su Lum is a longtime local who looks forward to Squirm Night tonight on GrassRoots TV. Check the paper for times. This column appears every Wednesday in The Aspen Times.

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Aspen and Snowmass Village make the Aspen Times’ work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.

For tax deductible donations, click here.

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