Your Letters |

Your Letters

Citizens of New Castle beware.

Ballot issue No. 2 is another tax. You will find this issue on the mail-in ballot you will receive in the mail.

After reviewing the very vague wording in the handout provided by the town, I had a meeting with Andy Barton, the town administrator, to try to clarify what this tax would cost us. Mr. Barton had to make phone calls to other town employees to get answers to my questions because there is nothing in writing describing this proposed ordinance.

I was told that if passed the ordinance will be a 2 percent tax on the purchase price of any vehicle purchased after the ballot issue is approved by the voters. This would be every vehicle registered by the state. If you live in the town limits and purchase a new or used vehicle – car, truck, trailer, motor home, etc. – you will pay a 2 percent tax to the town of New Castle.

On March 2, I attended the town council meeting to discuss my concerns. When I brought up the vagueness of the proposed ordinance the town attorney told me they tried to write it onto the ballot but it was too long and nobody would read it (translation: We poor citizens are too stupid to comprehend it). He told me the ordinance would be written after the ballot passed. Written after it was passed!

I urge you to vote no on issue No. 2. We don’t need another tax following on the heels of recent sewer fees and water rate increases.

Perry Sweeney

New Castle

In response to Michael Waxfield.

Do you really believe that marijuana should be sold at pharmacies? You cannot compare marijuana to prescription drugs or alcohol. Have you counted how many liquor stores are in town? I don’t hear anyone complaining about that. My best advice for you is to go into several different stores and ask the questions. I know it is going to take some time to fine tune the laws; nothing worthwhile happens overnight.

Jenell Hilderbrand

Glenwood Springs

We need an alternate route when the canyon is closed that is not 200 miles long. Cottonwood Pass seems like the first logical choice. There are plenty of dirt contractors, concrete plants, engineering firms, and skilled workers sitting idle with our shovels ready. The local powers that be need to take a look at this possibility. Shovel ready vs. shovels ready…. not that big of a difference.

One other option may possibly be a canyon train. The train tracks are on the opposite side of the river from I-70, and have rock fall protection in place already. Maybe if RFTA and Eagle County Transit worked together to provide service at their respective ends of the route, it would provide a much larger area covered by public transit thus hopefully increasing commuter use. The canyon train, if it ran from Gypsum to Glenwood Springs, would connect the Roaring Fork Valley to the airport in Gypsum, making it easier for tourists to get to Glenwood. It could be a sightseeing train through the canyon at the same time, offering round trips. …

I think the time to act on an alternate route for the canyon is here. Each time the canyon has had damage like this, we learn the rocks will win, most of the time. The odds of both the train tracks and I-70 being blocked at the same time seem small if you consider past history.

Brad Gates

New Castle

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Glenwood Springs and Garfield County make the Post Independent’s 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