Jump to content
Missing rafter in Dinosaur located, identified June 26, 2016
I agree. How do we go about doing this? Is it too late to put it on the November ballot? If anyone is interested, I would be more than willing to help out, I just don't know anything about the process.
The Craigfireboard response makes no sense. Once again they can't get their own facts straight. They said they are going to curtail burning when the wind direction is out of the north. The structure is being built on the south side of the hospital. They need to curtail burning when the wind direction is out of the south - which in the summertime, is MOST OF THE TIME! And it's only 740 feet away from the hospital.
A request for a zoning varience (because this project does NOT meet zoning requirements) has been requested by the Craig Rural Fire Protection District. A public hearing will be held at 6:00 on 4/16/2012 at the Craig City Council Chambers. Written objections may be filed with the city clerk any time before the hearing. You conveniently left that out Craigfireboard.
The spin I see is coming from the fire board.
In the original article that outlined this project, Willems stated that they would be burning old furniture like couches etc.(they do produce black smoke) but NOW says that they will be burning other materials that don't produce smoke. So which one is it, or are we just being told what they want us to hear?
This is being built southwest of the hospital, the wind direction that we have for most of the summer months. What could go wrong with that?
This project does not meet zoning restrictions. It should be built outside of town where it belongs, or not built at all.
This project does not meet zoning requirements and the city is asking for a varience of the heighth restrictions, according to a sign that is posted on the entrance to this site. One would think that this would be important enough to be a "news" item that should have been included in this article.
The sign says that public input can be sent to the city clerk or discussed at an April 16th, 6 pm meeting at City Hall with the Planning and Zoning Board.
I don't believe that I am the only person who pays taxes in this town. I do believe that EVERY taxpayer has the right to see that his/her taxes are being spent wisely, even if DavidMoore doesn't approve of it.
I will be forwarding my input to the Planning and Zoning Board and ask them to enforce the zoning regulations that currently exist.
You are absolutely correct Smalltowner that this is wasteful, deceptive politics.
It didn't make any sense to me that this tower would be built near an electrical substation and 2 power lines, the new hospital, a hotel, a National Park Service hiking trail and the Overlook housing subdivision. All are within a few hundred yards of the structure. But then, it dawned on me that phase two has already been planned out and a new fire station is soon to follow in the same location. Now it all makes sense.
The only hosing I see is directed towards the taxpayers. We are getting hosed again.
If the fire chief wants to build a new play house with the money that was supposed to be spent on upgrading outdated equipment, I say go for it, because we the taxpayers were stupid enough to vote for a tax increase without really knowing where it was going to be spent. We gave them a blank check. They're cashing it in.
However, putting this project in an area where the smoke and carcinogens might affect people living in the area tells me that this hasn't been thought out very well. I wonder how the hospital patients are going to feel when the air handling units start sucking smoke into their building. If this burn tower produces any smoke or carcinogens that I have to breathe, the EPA is going to get a call to put a halt to it.
If this needs to be built, do it at the landfill, where it would affect fewer people, and there is a source for burn materials.
There are many differing opinions where the word Sioux originated. What you quoted is an opinion, one I have never heard before. It seems to be based more on opinion than on fact.
I always understood that the name Sioux was given to the Dakota by the Ojibway, and it meant "little snakes." It was not meant as an insult, and it had nothing to do with the devil.
I have also read that it was given to the Dakota by the French trappers. In Wikipedia it says "The name "Sioux" is an abbreviated form of Nadouessioux borrowed into Canadian French from Nadoüessioüak from the early Odawa exonym: naadowesiwag." It was first used in the written form in 1640 to describe the Iroquoi.
I have never heard anyone say that the word means devil, until your post. The word Dakota or Nakota or Lakota means "allies" and many North Dakotans interpret that to mean "friend". There is nothing derogatory or insulting about the words Dakota or Sioux. They are an important part of our culture and history as a nation.
This morning, the president of the University of North Dakota, reversed himself, and said that the Fighting Sioux logo and nickname would be used by the University again. That made my day. Go Sioux!
The acorn didn't fall far from the tree. Doesn't anyone remember Hayden's Police Chief Lenahan? You should.
Read this article. It will stun you.
Staying clear of oil production sites is a matter of common sense.
Those laws you refer to are state laws, and regulated by the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission. If you are concerned about a specific site, contact COGC and have them put up a sign on the fence.
I did a little research on the numbers of medical marijuana patients in Routt County. The CDPHE lists 1143 patients. The average age of all patients in Colorado is 40. I also checked the student enrollment at CMC - Steamboat campus. It has 1262 students. Routt County has an estimated population of 24,000 and Steamboat Springs 12,180.
Now, if what Willems said is true, we should have 1200 CMC students registered as mmj patients and 1218 Steamboat Springs residents registered (1 in 10). That adds up to 2400 medical marijuana licenses, just for Steamboat. Yet the official CDPHE number is 1143 for ALL of Routt County which includes another 12,000 people.
The numbers for most of the ski areas are similar. Pitkin, Eagle, and Summitt Counties are all in the 1% range.
The questions I have for Mr. Willems are:
How do you know that most students at CMC are registered mmj patients, when the state does not ask your occupation or student status when applying for a license?
How do you know that 1 in 10 Steamboat Springs residents are license holders when the state only lists patients by county?
When I look at the official numbers, I come to the conclusion that 1 in 100 people (or less) have medical marijuana licenses in Routt County, which includes Steamboat Springs. That isn't even close to the numbers that Willems cited.
So who are you going to believe, the official state numbers, or Mr. Willems?
Last login: Thursday, April 3, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.