The question is: Why?

Three minutes. That’s the amount of time El Paso County residents have traditionally been given to address the Board of County Commissioners during public comment. In past hearings, residents have also been permitted to voluntarily give their time to designated speakers when they prefer not to speak themselves, allowing communities to present organized, thoughtful testimony.

On July 23, that changed.

Moments before a highly anticipated quasi-judicial hearing, residents learned they would be limited to just 90 seconds each and would not be permitted to give their time to others. There are also no publicly available written procedures explaining how residents may submit presentations or organize testimony during these hearings.

The Chair was within her legal authority to make that decision. But that’s not the question residents are asking. The question is: Why?

Why make this decision for this hearing? Why limit public participation when applicants are afforded substantial presentation time and an opportunity for rebuttal? Why are the rules for citizen participation left to be determined moments before a hearing?

The Board’s own Rules and Procedures state that “The Chair shall ensure that a full and fair due process hearing is provided to all participants in the hearing.”

Fairness is about more than legality. It is about transparency, consistency and predictability.

The public came prepared. Residents spent weeks reviewing the Master Plan, studying the approval criteria and preparing factual, evidence-based testimony. They did exactly what we hope engaged citizens will do.

The Tri-Lakes community rose to the occasion despite the last-minute change. But citizens deserve to know the rules before they walk into the room.

The question isn’t whether the Chair could make this decision. It’s what she will do moving forward to ensure that every resident understands the process and can participate meaningfully.

Marti Zehr-Breedlove

Walden

No work done in subdivision

I live in a subdivision just south of the one you named in a recent letter to the editor, just south across Issaquah, between Peterson and Marksheffel.

The letter writer complained of poor slurry work and street seam fill-in. Well, they have received 2 slurry treatments and seam fill-ins in the past 3 years and we have had no work performed on ours. Every day I ride my bike in your subdivision because the streets are so smooth. We have old road treatment and 2 to 6 inch gaps at most seams, and they range from 2 to 6 inches deep.

I have written to the Mayor and City Streets Division complaining about our streets and have received no response or streets worked on. So consider your situation lucky. Someone high in the city must live in your subdivision for you to get these treatments when a neighboring subdivision gets nothing.

Steven Opdycke

Colorado Springs

Bike lanes and safety

In your July 24 article “Trump administration presses for permanent daylight saving time,” you report that Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy urged Congress to “…restrict formula grant funding for bicycle lanes and other bicycle infrastructure…”.

Thirty years ago, I was bike commuting home from my job at TRW/Northrop Grumman when I was hit by a car on the then bike-lane-free Fountain Boulevard just west of Academy; I flew 25 feet through the air but survived with only a destroyed bicycle, an inaccurate throwing arm and a bill for one night in Penrose Hospital.

Over the following 15 years, Colorado Springs built bike paths and bike lanes (no doubt with help from federal grants) that made my commute to and from Manitou Springs much safer.

I’m now 75 and retired, but on July 23 I was riding home from downtown on the Midland Trail (surrounded by more cyclists than I could have imagined in 1996) when I heard Mr. Duffy’s comments reported at much greater length by NPR: He vowed to end support for “DEI bike lanes and his department has removed all references to the benefits of bike lanes and trails along with an analysis tool that allows users to quantify those benefits.

The bike infrastructure that Mr. Duffy disdains protects me (and all those other cyclists) from additional injury. It also takes thousands of cars off the road and avoids the gigantic expense of building new roads to accommodate those cars.

Alan Siegel

Manitou Springs

Test political candidates

I have studied the laws that have been passed by our current legislators here in Colorado during the past two years. As an example: Prior to purchasing a firearm, Colorado 25-003 requires law-abiding citizens to take two, not just one, but two background checks, pass a safety class with a score of at least 90% up to 12 hours and (anywhere from $200 up), a permit to purchase from the local sheriff (can be $52). This is just for a law-abiding citizen to receive permission to purchase a firearm. Then they have permission to purchase their firearm, pay the 6.5% excise tax and then there is the 3-day waiting period before they can pick it up and take it home. Criminals, of course, are not required to go through these steps.

As a result, I have come to the conclusion that candidates for political office need to be required to pass a test with a score of at least 90% indicating their competency in all the rights of the citizens of the United States of America. This test would demonstrate their knowledge and full comprehension of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. There would also be a section of the test that would cover their knowledge of the rights of the citizens of our own state constitution.

This test would need to show that each candidate understands the difference between innocent citizens and criminal behavior and how to apply the law to each. They would need to show they can define conclusively the difference between victim and perpetrator/suspect. They would also need to have a working knowledge of the differences between citizens and non-citizens and the rights of each. This test also applies to candidates up for re-election.

Paul Nigro

Colorado Springs