|
A Fond Farewell For Rich Delanoy
Dear Editor:
As The Profile mentioned
last month, Rich Delanoy was truly “a good neighbor and
friend,” and will be dearly missed. He loved the city of Denver and was a major
contributor to the Platt Park neighborhood, to wit:
• Rich was a fervent defender of property
rights, but balanced that with a keen appreciation and knowledge of the history
of Denver’s architecture;
• Despite full awareness of his terminal
condition, in early 2012 he was determined to sit through a long, tedious
meeting of the Planning Board, regardless of his physical pain, to ensure that
proposed new signage above Mile High Stadium was not approved;
• At annual
meetings between the Denver Board of Realtors and Denver city officials, he
compiled a creative list of trivia questions focusing on Denver and Colorado
history;
• An active member
of the Platt Park People’s Association (3PA), he was instrumental in having the
light rail station named “Louisiana/Pearl,” rather than the originally proposed
“Louisiana” name;
• Rich annually opened up the parking lot of
his South Pearl St. building for a “Winterfest”
event, where he and his volunteers served spiced cider, hot chocolate and
roasted chestnuts to hundreds of parents and their kids, who also took turns
sitting on Santa’s lap. Proceeds from the drink contributions were given to 3PA;
• He enjoyed having children walk by his
office and look at the miniature blue bear he had standing in the window (still
there), eye height for those youngsters.
• Rich was a modest man, seldom talking
about his own achievements. Many people would be unaware, for example, that he
was a master gardener, or that he once ran a 22-second-flat 220-yard dash in
high school.
At the celebration of Rich’s life, held at
the Black Pearl Restaurant and generously hosted by proprietor Steve Whited,
the eclectic group of attendees from all walks of life and spanning several
generations was testimony to the impact that Rich had on people he touched. He
would be proud to know that the Profile said that he was, “A good
neighbor and friend ... with ... countless contributions to our neighborhood
and our city.”
Fred E. Hammer,
one of those friends
Money Talks In Denver Parks
Dear Editor:
Regarding the recent construction
of the array of new running trails in Washington Park, Denver Parks and Rec and
Denver County honchos should be ashamed of themselves for ruining the peace and
quiet of several multi-use areas, while simultaneously killing brand new trees
and disturbing wildlife. Instead of caving in to a select group of greedy and
insensitive citizens, they should have maintained the character of the park for
all of the users and just simply advised said joggers/runners to find
alternatives to their lust for a year-round exercise high.
Ironically,
neither of the two main reasons for making the superfluous modifications has
been addressed with the new paths. As a matter of fact, they will prove to be
worse. The additional maze of gravel paths are mostly built across shaded areas
that will stay wet and icy much longer than the original paths that exist along
the warm street ROW’s. And the additional trails constructed through secluded
places are much more unsafe at night than the original paths on the outlying
edges of the park as well. So, the issues of defrosting of snow from trails and
the safety for runners were an absolute ruse along with the ludicrous meetings
staged for the public comments.
Now we can look forward to toddlers getting
run into around the picnic area behind the fire station, red-winged blackbirds
being targeted for annihilation for diving at people running through the Lily
Pond wetlands in mating season, more trees being torn out and/or dying from
lack of water and soil, militant bicyclists demanding for a heated bike lane,
requests for additional invasive lighting in the new areas, and more
confrontations between runners and other park patrons now that they have gotten
their way.
Denver parks are multi-use facilities and
should be maintained with all activities in mind, not just one exclusive
activity. The money donated for these elitists could have been spent to
maintain the existing paths and improve the park landscaping, etc. If that was
not acceptable to the benefactors, they should have been turned away without any
public debate.
This is a perfect example of the old proverb
“Money talks and detritus walks” (or in this case runs). It also lends itself
to ponder the statement that “an asset is worth whatever someone is prepared to
pay for it,” which is both a tautology and an extremely misleading theory.
Denver Parks and City Council have created an alarming model to say the least.
Michael Dylan, Denver
Likes B-Cycle Idea In Wash Park
Dear Editor:
Cindy Johnstone,
in her recent letter to the editor, requests your readers “to imagine a
40-foot-plus B-cycle station spanning 40 feet of Marion Pkwy.” Well, I have
been imagining what the addition of this station would mean to our neighborhood
and I like what I see.
When I envision improvements to our park I
think the addition of more bikes is a positive development. Having fewer cars,
and the dangerous traffic issues that accompany them is an obvious improvement,
but so is the thought that more folk can enjoy Wash Park and our neighborhood
in a safer and more leisurely manner.
I imagine families, friends, and the
occasional tourists riding the park roads, frequenting the neighborhood
eateries and coffee shops, and helping to keep our streets more bike and
pedestrian friendly. If my vision is accurate, maybe these bicycles will help
to reduce the car traffic and erratic driving that compromise our enjoyment and
safety of using the park and surrounding areas during the weekend. Given all of
this, I have to wonder if Mrs. Johnstone is in need
of greater imagination, particularly as her inability to see the potential
benefits that more bike riders will bring surely outweighs the minor aesthetic
concern of one B-cycle station.
Sincerely,
R. H. Kellas
This Robin Sings Out Of Tune
Dear Editor:
Robin Kniech’s
propaganda piece in your June paper piqued my interest, and concern. Her lament
is government does not have enough tools to raise funds. She says spending must
be cut, at least during hard times, but fails to mention numerous tax increases
that have been enacted.
Ms. Kniech stated
property tax funding of government services dropped from 20 percent to 8
percent. That is intentionally misleading. The alphabet tax enacted several
years ago – designed to fund maintenance she suggests will have to be
deferred – raised $85 per household. Gov. Ritter doubled the license fee
on vehicles. And Denver has wasted money, spending $60 million on the homeless
in less than a decade. And millions more on “Doggy Parks.”
Property tax might be a smaller part of the
solution because Council enacted a rezoning code in July 2011 that reduced
residential property values by as much as two billion dollars.
I disagree with Ms. Kniech’s
assessment of the property tax as regressive. Forty years of experience in the sales,
property, excise, and income tax areas tell me the more complex the tax, the
more regressive the tax. Property taxes are second only to income tax in
complexity.
The most fair and least regressive tax is a
sales tax. If necessities –
food, shelter, and healthcare – are exempted, the poor do quite well. Of
course, a sales tax is transparent so citizens can readily determine what their
government is costing. As a
spender, Ms. Kniech may not like that aspect.
Another thought. We could save quite a bit by eliminating
the two “at-large” council positions.
Or Council could take a pay cut, and truly be part of the solution.
Thank you.
Nilram Tuohrod
(Name changed to protect
the innocent.) |
