| PostIndependent.com

Shannon column: The Trump appointee who believed Trump

The suggestion that the Trump administration release illegal aliens in sanctuary cities was the inspiration of Deputy White House Policy Coordinator May Davis.

Broaching this idea indicates that Davis is either very courageous or never plans on eating an undisturbed restaurant meal in the D.C. area again.

Davis’ inspiration is a brilliantly creative example of political jujitsu. It takes what your opponent considers to be a strength – compassion for “undocumented immigrants” – and turns it into a negative when the beneficiaries of the bad idea land on unsuspecting resident’s doorsteps.

Even better, any complaint about receiving more of the illegals the politicians claim to love only exposes their moral exhibitionism.

Unfortunately, the reaction to Davis’ idea is additional proof of why conservatives and Republicans are going to be utterly defeated by the Open Borders left.

The left is focused on ends. The Democrat party wants to change the electorate through immigration regardless of whether the individual immigrant is legal or illegal.

In support of this long,’term goal the left ignores hundreds of American citizens killed by illegal aliens. It ignores citizens raped by illegal aliens. It ignores citizens assaulted by illegals. It ignores identity theft, welfare abuse and the billions spent by taxpayers to support illegal aliens.

The goal of a permanent leftist voting majority is too important to be delayed by sympathy for citizens whose luck ran out.

Republicans focus on staying in office while staying out of late night comedy sketches. They care more about avoiding a negative reaction by the leftist street (like the Arab street only without burning tires) than they do about achieving goals.

Judging by the reaction of National Review writer David French you’d have thought the idea of giving sanctuary cities more of the diversity that makes us so strong came from some community college Deplorable with a BMI of 50, instead of a graduate of Harvard Law School and former president of the Federalist Society in Cambridge.

French contends using “human beings as pawns” is repugnant, cruel and in his opinion “politically disastrous.” He’s also worried about Opposition Media coverage of the “compassion” that will be displayed in San Francisco when the caravan of illegals arrives.

This petticoat,’ruffling on French’s part is another form of surrender. Preserving the status quo on immigration equals defeat. Unless we work to change some of the variables in this equation the only unknown is when Republicans eventually disappear.

The “human beings” French is protecting with McAllen, Tx.’s tax dollars are volunteers here only to strip-mine American generosity. They continue to volunteer because there is no downside to being an illegal. If putting them on a bus is “cruel” then so be it. Let’s hope word gets back to Latin America.

French’s indirect support of the current catch,’and,’release policy means Trump is punishing the residents of states that voted for him, namely Arizona and Texas. What’s sensible about that? What is repugnant about giving voters that support sanctuary politicians more of the illegals they long to embrace?

French contends it will cause “chaos” there. Good. Better California and Massachusetts than Yuma, Ariz. which has just declared a state of emergency.

Reaction within the executive branch was no better. The fascists in the White House were routed by a red tape wielding defender of the administrative state. The New York Times reports Davis’ idea was presented to Acting ICE Director Matthew Albence who exercised the bureaucrat’s veto. He claimed ICE would be subject to “liability issues” during transport and had concerns about budget allocations.

And this character is supposed to be a “hard liner” on enforcement.

It’s not Albence’s job to approve or disapprove of the administration’s policy. His job to execute administration policy.

Donald Trump was given a nationwide mandate by voters to carry out his campaign platform. Albence hasn’t been elected to anything. He doesn’t run an ‘independent agency.’ He’s part of the administration. If he can’t perform his duties he needs to resign.

And how does the man who pledged to drain the swamp respond when some random alligator burps? Instead of sending a message by firing Albence, Trump surrenders again.

If Trump can’t find the motivation to impose his will on his own administration there is no chance he can impose his will on the open borders left. Winning this fight is going to take a sustained effort and a willingness to be impervious to the Sad Story Industrial Complex run by the Opposition Media. I don’t think Trump or his appointees have what it takes.

Millions of voters across the nation who want their country back voted for Trump in 2016. It’s too bad he couldn’t convince any of them to join his administration.

Michael Shannon can be reached at mandate.mmpr@ gmail.com.

Parker column: It is finished

WASHINGTON — Good Friday provided the language for a week that began with the terrible fire at Notre Dame Cathedral and ended with the long-awaited Mueller report: Jesus’ final words before perishing on the cross: “It is finished!”

The fires have been extinguished and the great cathedral’s two towers still stand. After nearly two years, special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into possible obstruction of justice and collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign has finally ended.

There was no collusion.

In the span of a few days, we’ve been joggled between the banal and the sublime, from Trump’s “I’m [effed]” upon learning of Mueller’s assignment to the investigation to the millions who prayed that centuries of beauty be spared by the flames.

And yet, there is hope in the ashes. As Christians celebrate Easter Sunday and the resurrection of Christ, there is talk of rebuilding — another cathedral rising from the ashes. What has been lost can’t be replaced, but a church is not principally an edifice. All those who have labored and convened beneath Notre Dame’s enormous roof left something of themselves behind. Not even fire can destroy the immeasurable power imbued by centuries of meditations, supplications and grace.

Perhaps it is the season of penance and rebirth. But when I read the Mueller report, a redacted version of which was released to Congress and the public Thursday amid a flurry of media-induced hysteria, I saw corruption and misery. Trump, whom I don’t hate, contrary to what some readers say in their profanity-laced emails, is a villain but also a tragic figure. For him, there is never enough of anything — riches, possessions, attention and adulation.

At times, I feel sorry for him, because he has invited the wrath of millions and it can’t be easy to shoulder so much disapproval. When I said this recently to a friend, she replied: “It’s hard to feel sorry for someone who has no empathy.” True, but a person without empathy — the ability to feel what others do — walks a lonely path. Driven by lust for the material, such a person doesn’t know the company of what ancient philosophers called the transcendentals — truth, goodness and beauty, which correspond sequentially to the mind, the will and the heart, and which, according to Christian theology, lead to God’s infinite love.

Trump wages daily war against truth. Examples of his falsehoods and outright lies could fill a doorstop volume. In his report, Mueller further revealed that Press Secretary Sarah Sanders repeatedly lied to the public while accusing the media of producing “fake news.” Deceit begets more deceit.

Goodness is missing everywhere. Trump may have some good qualities, though it is hard to discern them given his propensity for hurtful, divisive rhetoric. To him, goodness is what he wills it to be, that which nourishes his narcissism and appetites, whether the compliance of women or the loyalty of comrades. Ironically, disloyalty may have saved him when aides refused to carry out his orders to obstruct the Mueller investigation.

Beauty, we’re told, is in the eye of the beholder. But is it? The Catholic intellectual tradition teaches that truth, goodness and beauty are “transcendentals” because they transcend time and place. Also, they are all part of and flow into each other. Truth is good and beautiful; goodness is true and beautiful; beauty is true and good.

One needn’t be a theologian, philosopher or Christian to recognize that Trump, defiant before truth and lacking goodwill, knows beauty only as a standard for useful women or towers bearing his name. He worships not in the cathedral of “our lady” but in the House of Gaud. Had Trump tagged along on Indiana Jones’ “last crusade,” we know which chalice he would have thought belonged to Jesus.

Although Mueller ultimately found Trump innocent of collusion, the special counsel made it clear that he was not innocent of obstruction of justice. Because Department of Justice policy prohibits indicting a sitting president, Mueller suggested that “Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office,” in accordance “with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”

Most telling of all, however, was Trump’s own exclamation when Attorney General Jeff Sessions told him about the Mueller appointment.

“Oh my God,” he said, according to the report. “… This is the end of my presidency. I’m f—-ed.” Would that his prophesy come to pass and this ungodly episode in American history be finished.

Kathleen Parker’s email address is kathleenparker@washpost.com.

Letter: Trump’s collusion with Russia

April 16, 2018 was a day of overwhelming excitement for our nation’s Democrats and especially, the reporters of the New York Times and Washington Post who received the coveted Pulitzer Prize for national reporting.
In announcing the winners, prize administrator Dana Canedy noted that the winning stories illustrated the necessity of a free press even as Donald Trump regularly inveighs against “fake news.” The Pulitzer board said, “For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connection to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration.”
The New York Times, on their website of April 16, 2018 briefly describing their own award as “the national reporting prize went to The Times and The Washington Post for their coverage of Mr. Trump’s possible ties to Russia — a recognition of two journalism stalwarts that exposed the hidden activities of the Trump White House while withstanding much presidential ire.”
The Pulitzer board, the Times and the Post will shrug their shoulders and say “who cares if some say Trump’s innocent,” we’ll move beyond our groundbreaking disclosure of his collusion with the Russians. The Democratic Party along with the national and local press have the next two years to begin their relentless task to uncover, with the help of additional deep sources, Trump’s criminal activity in obstructing justice.
Floyd Diemoz,
Glenwood Springs

Letter: The mayor does represent all of our citizens

As someone who has had the honor of being “selected” as Glenwood’s mayor on three occasions, I feel that it is time for the City Council to give serious consideration to supporting a change to the process by which our mayor is chosen. While it is true that the position of mayor is largely ceremonial with the primary functions being to serve as the chair of meetings and the signing of legal documents on behalf of the city, the mayor does represent all of our citizens and is also seen as a spokesperson for our community. As a result, I feel that the mayor should be elected by the citizens rather than chosen by as few as four members of the Council.
Even now, eight years after my last term, residents continue to ask me why Glenwood’s mayor is not elected by the people. During my three terms as mayor, I and other council members suggested that consideration be given to amending the city charter to require that the mayor be elected by the community at large. We were not successful in this effort as others felt that a change would add too much complexity to the election process. While this change would require some reorganization of the current ward/at-large distribution it, in my opinion, would give the community a better understanding of the qualifications and values of those desiring to serve as mayor and, more importantly, the power to choose him or her to the people.
Bruce Christensen,
Glenwood Springs

Cepeda column: Unauthorized immigrants help prop up America’s economy

CHICAGO — Whenever I see a viral video of a racist person harassing a Spanish speaker with brown skin because they seem “illegal,” I comfort myself with the vivid image of millions of Latinos watching the spectacle with bafflement as they fan themselves with a stack of $100 bills.

It’s not silly.

People act like unauthorized immigrants are the biggest pox upon the Great American Experiment, but the fact is that immigrants pour billions of dollars into the tax coffers of local and state governments every year. In fact, they paid an estimated $11.7 billion just in 2014, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy. This includes an estimated $1.1 billion in state income taxes and $3.6 billion in property taxes.

Federal taxes can be added on top: The IRS estimated in 2015 that 4.4 million income-tax returns came from workers with no Social Security numbers, resulting in $23.6 billion in income taxes. This, of course, doesn’t include payroll taxes or the taxes paid by immigrants who work on someone else’s Social Security number.

For years, it’s been an open secret that unauthorized immigrant workers are propping up the Social Security retirement trust fund and Medicare systems — even though they can’t access benefits from either of those programs.

Most people don’t know that there’s been a system in place for unauthorized immigrants and other foreign-born people to get Taxpayer Identification Numbers with which to file income taxes since 1996.

Moreover, schemes to legalize immigrants have often hinged on requiring them to prove they have a track record of paying their taxes. This has, at least in part, resulted in a windfall for the government.

You also have to stop to consider that unauthorized immigrants represent but a small percentage of all the Latinos in our country — as a whole, all immigrants represent only about a third of all Hispanics.

And make no mistake: Latinos have money. They also have property.

“Over the past decade, Hispanics have accounted for 62.7 percent of net U.S. homeownership gains, growing from 6,303,000 homeowners to 7,877,000, a total increase of 1,574,000 Hispanic homeowners,” according to the 2018 State of Hispanic Home Ownership report from the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals.

This same report calculated that the median household income for Hispanics rose to $50,486 in 2017, accounting for the largest increase in income (3.7 percent) among all racial or ethnic population groups.

As if this weren’t enough, we’re just sunnier about our finances than almost anyone else. In a recent analysis of national survey results, Florida Atlantic University found that 67 percent of Hispanics said they are financially better off today than a year ago, and 74 percent said they’d be better off over the next year. Meanwhile, 59 percent said they expected the country as a whole to experience good business conditions in the upcoming year.

Only people with a vested interest in a business would forecast economic conditions for the year ahead, folks.

None of these numbers fits with the impoverished, downtrodden and marginalized people you might imagine if your only exposure to immigrants is what you see on cable TV.

But, alas, well-to-do Hispanics who are the third or fourth generation in a family to attend a good college — or who are simply successful in life without having been traumatized at the border or otherwise harmed — are not of great interest to lots of people in the mainstream media who have the power to tell stories about middle- and upper-class Latinos.

To borrow the tortured cliché about how Hispanic voting power is a “Sleeping Giant,” many Latinos are unaware of the strength they wield in the marketplace as well. And, alas, so far they are unable or unwilling to transform their considerable economic clout into the kind of political power that stops prejudiced people from attacking those who “look” or “sound” like an unauthorized immigrant.

Don’t let ignorance get you down, though.

Remember: There are way more Latinos who have the capacity to use fistfuls of hundred-dollar bills to cool themselves than there are close-minded bigots who think they’re entitled to harass someone just based on the color of their skin or their ability to speak a second language.

Esther Cepeda’s email address is estherjcepeda@washpost.com, or follow her on Twitter: @estherjcepeda.

Guest Opinion: Roads are the losers in 2019 Colorado Legislature

Fixing the crumbling and crowded roads across our state has been a talking point for politicians in Colorado for years, as the project backlog has grown to more than $9 billion.

Democrats who control the purse in the legislature don’t seem to feel any urgency to fix the funding issues creating the backlog. In his first address to the General Assembly, Governor Polis spent mere seconds talking about the underfunded transportation infrastructure, offering no real solution.

Even though many legislators made it part of their campaigns, funding for road improvements has unfortunately been a victim of the dysfunction and liberal agenda of the leaders of the Democratic majority. They seem to be counting on the roads getting so bad that Coloradans will approve a tax increase just to fix them.

Last November, Coloradans rejected both a sales tax increase and a bonding proposal that would have made a dent in the backlog of projects. That’s an incredibly clear message to legislators — prioritize our budget to fix critical infrastructure problems across the state.

How did fixing our roads become such an afterthought — allowing so many unfunded projects to back up over the years? Numbers released by the Colorado Department of Transportation calculate that paving one lane of one mile of roadway costs taxpayers $1.5 million, and one lane of widening a roadway will cost us $2 million.

If the current status quo remains, CDOT is projecting a $25 billion funding gap over the next 25 years. Fixing roads ain’t cheap, but they are necessary.

The most significant difference between my political philosophy and that of many of my Democratic friends is in what the ultimate goal and responsibility of government should be. By the votes of last November, it appears that most Coloradans agree with me that it is a basic role of government to prioritize funding infrastructure and fixing our roads and bridges.

Instead of doing the hard work, Democrats in the legislature are heading towards approving one-time minimal funding for road improvements, while developing ideas for “new revenue” (translation: tax increases).

There’s a plan to attempt to dismantle our Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights by asking voters to permanently give back their tax refunds to the state. The proposal would destroy the part of our Constitution that puts spending guardrails on our government, without providing a stable funding mechanism for transportation.

There is also discussion of a gas tax … but they’ll call it a “fee” to avoid asking for taxpayer approval as specified by TABOR.

I live in the Denver area and I’m part of the large number of people who take the opportunity most weekends to get out of the city and head to the mountains, and regularly visit my family on the Western Slope. It’s a lifestyle that usually comes with a choice of waking up long before dawn or sitting in hours of traffic — no matter what season it is.

It’s frustrating to sit in traffic, but the consequences of bad roads can be much more far reaching than getting a late start on a ski day. They get us to work, keep our economy moving, transport medical emergencies and connect Coloradans.

It’s beyond time that the Legislature make it a priority — like many said they would during campaign season — and fix our roads.

Lindsey Singer is communications director for the political action group Colorado Rising Action.

West column: New Immigrations challenges loom for America

It’s been just a week since Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen was forced to resign from her post. While her departure was long overdue, it is also a sobering reminder of two critical facts in the age of Trump.

Former Secretary Nielsen approved the policy that led to the aggressive separation of children and parents on the southern border of the U.S. She did so in the hopes, shared with then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, that this inhumane punishment would deter legal migration. And when questioned about the chaotic effects of her decision, she lied about it.

So on the one hand, Nielsen’s resignation is good: The policy that she authorized, implemented, and provided cover for created a logistical nightmare and incredible pain for innocent people. At least two children and one parent died in the course of detention. The American Academy of Pediatrics said that trauma from such a separation, even without reported instances of physical and sexual abuse, can stay with children for a lifetime. DHS took no steps to record which children were being separated from which parents, and the administration itself acknowledges that it may take two years to sort out the mess. And governments around the world denounced the United States, President Reagan’s “shining city on a hill,” for our morally abhorrent actions.

The severity of what Nielsen oversaw is a critical reminder that Trump administration “formers” must not be allowed to exit public life through the typical Washington revolving door that places them in cushy corporate, academic or lobbying gigs. From Sean Spicer’s book tour to Scott Pruitt’s energy consulting business to Corey Lewandowski’s Harvard fellowship, the post-Trump landings to date have been far too forgiving. It is incumbent on the media, academia and industry to stop rewarding these people for their moral failings.

It will also be the task of the next Democratic administration to hold those who executed on President Trump’s policies accountable. The Obama administration’s failure to prosecute or even publicly name and shame the Bush administration leaders who embraced torture (against both American values and operational effectiveness) was a failure that we cannot bear to repeat again. If children were orphaned, abused and traumatized by the U.S. government — and they were — people in leadership positions must be made to answer for the policies that caused it.

But these are long-term problems. As we look to the immediate future, there is the second issue with Nielsen’s departure: that whoever follows her may well be worse. Nielsen reportedly left the administration, after all, in the midst of a fight with the president about restarting the family separation policy. And since her recent departure, similar exits at DHS (among them Acting Deputy Secretary Claire Grady and Secret Service Director Randolph “Tex” Alles) have followed.

In fact, the speculation in Washington is that White House advisor Stephen Miller has targeted even more DHS appointees for removal in the service of a more extreme immigration policy. Whether or not that is true remains to be seen; the rate of turnover at the Trump administration is so high that ascribing rhyme or reason to it is a risky business. Regardless of who is pulling the levers of power, though, the change-up at DHS is a stark reminder that the cruelty and corruption that has so characterized this administration flows from the top down, meaning that each new appointee could well be worse than the last.

So ultimately, while Nielsen’s removal from DHS is ultimately a step forward for the nation, what comes next both in the long and short term matters just as much. It will be incumbent upon all of us to ensure that she and others are held accountable for the administration’s policies — and that they are the last ones making such harmful decisions in the first place.

Graham West is the communications director for Truman Center for National Policy and Truman National Security Project, though views expressed here are his own. You can reach West at gwest@trumancnp.org.

Will column: The electric-vehicle tax credit should be taken off the road

WASHINGTON — Some government foolishness has an educational value that compensates for its considerable cost. Consider the multibillion-dollar federal electric-vehicle tax credit, which efficiently illustrates how government can, with one act, diminish its already-negligible prestige while subtracting from America’s fairness. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., and Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., hope to repeal the tax credit, which probably will survive because it does something that government enjoys doing: It transfers wealth upward by subsidizing affluent individuals and large economic entities.

In 1992, Congress, with its itch to supplant the market in telling people what to build and buy, established a subsidy for buyers of electric vehicles, which then were a negligible fraction of the vehicle market. In 2009, however, as the nation reeled from the Great Recession, the Obama administration acted on an axiom of the president’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” Using the crisis as an excuse to do what they wanted to do anyway, those who think government planning of the U.S economy is a neat idea joined with environmentalists to persuade Congress — persuading it to dispense money is not difficult — to create a tax credit of up to $7,500 for consumers who buy battery-powered electric vehicles.

The tax credit was part of the administration’s “stimulus” package, which is most remembered for its promise of “shovel-ready” jobs. The president, too busy expanding the government to understand the consequences of prior expansions, discovered that such jobs are almost nonexistent, thanks to red tape that must be untangled before shovels can be wielded.

The tax credit quickly became another example of the government’s solicitousness for those who are comfortable, and who are skillful in defense of their comforts. Today, demand for electric cars is still insufficient to produce manufacturing economies of scale (after a decade of production, moral exhortations and subsidies, electric cars are a fraction of 1 percent of all vehicle sales), and batteries are expensive. So, The Wall Street Journal reports, the $42,000 average price for an electric car is $8,000 more than the average price of a new car, and $22,000 more than the average price of a new small gasoline-powered car.

The Pacific Research Institute has examined 2014 IRS data showing that 79 percent of the electric-vehicle tax credits were collected by households with adjusted gross incomes of more than $100,000, and 1 percent by households earning less than $50,000. A 2017 survey found that households earning $200,000 received the most from the tax credit.

Some states have augmented the federal credit: In California, where about half of electric vehicles are sold, consumers can gain up to $15,000; in insolvent Connecticut — blue states are incorrigible — $10,500. The credit is, however, capped: Manufacturers can sell only 200,000 vehicles eligible for the full credit. Now almost all manufacturers (including high-end companies Bentley, Aston Martin and Maserati) are entering the electric-vehicle sector, and the cap is impinging on some of them (General Motors, Nissan). So, at long last such vehicles can be allowed to sink or swim on their own, right?

Of course not. The Barrasso-Smith legislation is fiercely opposed by the manufacturers, who of course want to expand and entrench it by removing the cap, partly because they know what the Journal knows: “When Georgia ended its $5,000 state tax credit in 2015, sales of electric vehicles fell 89 percent in two months.”

Electric cars have cachet with advanced thinkers who want to be, or to be seen to be, environmentally nice. They do not think of such vehicles as 27.4 percent coal cars, that being the percentage of U.S. electricity generated by coal-fired power plants. According to a Manhattan Institute study:

“[B]ecause of stringent emissions standards and low-sulfur gasoline, new ICVs [internal combustion vehicles] today emit very little pollution, and they will emit even less in the future. Compared with new ICVs, ZEVs [zero-emissions vehicles] charged with the forecast mix of electric generation will emit more criteria air pollutants.” And the reduction of carbon dioxide — “less than 1 percent of total forecast[ed] energy-related U.S. CO2 emissions through 2050” — “will have no measurable impact on climate.”

The environmental excuse for the regressive tax credit being nonexistent, those Democratic senators whose presidential campaigns are fueled by fury about government being “rigged” for the benefit of “the rich” who are not paying “their fair share” will join their Wyoming colleague’s attempt to end the electric-vehicle tax credit, if they mean what they say. If.

George Will’s email address is georgewill@washpost.com.

Letter: Tired of dodging potholes

Our streets are in a ridiculously horrendous condition. The city deserves a big fat F! Since our repair the streets initiative did not pass, is the plan to just let them get so bad that only the most extreme 4×4 can navigate them? I’m tired of dodging potholes. We can do better then this!
Steve Hugill,
Glenwood Springs

Letter: Cattle guards are a waste of taxpayer dollars

I want the taxpayers to know where their tax dollars are going.
Garfield County has approved the installation of three cattle guards on County Road 306, also known as Wallace Creek. This area is rural countryside with free-range livestock grazing. These three new cattle guards span a distance of 0.2 miles. You might ask why an area so small requires three cattle guards. The only answer I can come up with is a few property owners do not want livestock walking by their driveways on the county road. Most of the property owners in that area have already installed cattle guards in their driveways to keep the livestock off their property.
Let me remind everyone that Colorado is a “fence out” state, so if a property owner does not want their neighbor’s livestock on their property they need to fence them out. One major safety concern is one of the cattle guards was put in a downhill corner! When winter comes, the cattle guards will be icy and everyone will be at risk of losing control and ending up in the ditch, or worse, hitting another car.
How did the county justify the need of these cattle guards and the cost involved? It takes two cattle guards to span across the road for each of the three cattle guards. You might be asking how much this project cost the taxpayers. Well a cattle guard alone costs from $2,600 to $10,000 each. You then have to pay the work crew, equipment costs for cutting the asphalt road and removing the dirt to place the cattle guards in, fencing along the county road connecting the cattle guards and clean up. Therefore, this project is maybe $60,000 to $90,000 of our taxpayer dollars! Furthermore, there was no notification to the property owners on County Road 306, so we had no opportunity to voice our concerns. County Road 306 on the Wallace Creek side now has seven cattle guards. I feel like this is a total waste of my tax dollars, resources and a major safety concern for anyone driving on County Road 306.
Amber Knox,
Parachute