Letters - Wednesday

Cops shouldn't be bullies

Why is it that some law enforcement officers seem to think that because they wear a badge, the rule of law and common sense do not apply to them? To some, it seems that intimidation, threatening and bullying of our kids is acceptable practice ("Questions arise following teen's suicide," The Gazette, March 20). This is not the first time that this has happened in our community. How many more of our kids do we need to lose before officers like Deputy Mike Kossman realize that what they do is not part of their job? How would this officer like it if some other adult approached his kids and threatened and scared them? Unless I am misinformed, this officer had no business talking to any of the kids without a parent or adult present to ensure that there was no wrongdoing.

I believe this deputy was out of line. He should not have interrogated the minor in any form without an adult present who would look out for the kid's interest, preferably a parent. Someone like Kossman should not be dealing with our kids. He does not have the presence of mind or demeanor to deal with our kids. Law enforcement officers are afforded protection under the law, but not when they abuse or violate the law.

Frank Edmiston, Colorado Springs

1D protects our airport

In his attempt to once again try to "Destroy Colorado Springs," Douglas Bruce is trying to campaign against the four city issues on this April's ballot. And because he knows that his logic is growing out of favor with the voters, he's resorting to simply lying to convince you to vote no.

He saves his most egregious falsehoods for 1D by calling it a "tax subsidy" and an attempt to "dismantle" the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, one step at a time.

Issue 1D seeks to simply replace the city's TABOR definition of an enterprise with the definition of an enterprise as found in the TABOR section in the state constitution.

Specifically, it limits the amount of federal grant funds city enterprises can receive to 25 percent of its total revenue. This limit has particular adverse consequences for the Colorado Springs Airport as it regularly receives grants from the Federal Aviation Administration. These grants come mainly from taxes collected on passenger tickets, air freight shipping and aviation fuel. The taxes are collected so they can be disbursed to airports around the country for improvements to aviation facilities and to improve various safety features.

In years when the airport is successful in receiving federal grant funds in excess of the 25 percent threshold, the airport no longer meets the definition of an enterprise under the City Charter and loses its enterprise status. This has serious consequences for both the airport enterprise and the city. Either the city has to refuse the grants, because it would push the city over its TABOR revenue cap, or accepts them but has to funnel 3 percent of the total amount, out of the General Fund, into the TABOR reserve, further depleting the city's ability to provide basic services such as police and fire protection.

Denver International Airport and all other enterprises throughout the state have no TABOR imposed limits on their receipt of federal grants. This issue is unique to Colorado Springs due to the definition of an enterprise in the City Charter. This limitation makes it difficult for the Colorado Springs Airport to compete with other airports for new service and facilities. In addition, there is a possible impact to military aviation as refusal of the grants would hamper the ability to serve Peterson AFB and deployments of Fort Carson personnel under our current agreements.

Whether 1D passes or fails, it will have no impact on taxes paid by city residents. The FAA will continue to collect the tax whether you are on a flight from Colorado Springs to Chicago or from San Francisco to New York. The passage of 1D would simply mean that taxes paid by Colorado Springs passengers will be allowed to be used in Colorado Springs and to be used for their stated purpose. Please vote yes on 1D.

Scott Hente, City Council, District 1, Colorado Springs

Amendment limits spending

Shortly, the Colorado House will hear SB228, a bill that will repeal the Arveschoug-Bird limit on government spending. It is disappointing in the midst of an economic crisis that the General Assembly is moving to encourage government growth.

Right now, the state budget is facing a nearly $1 billion shortfall. With such a massive deficit, Coloradans should expect our state to tighten its purse strings, but unfortunately, this is not the case.

This limit has been an important part of our state's history of smaller government and lower taxes. I believe our state constitution protects Arveschoug-Bird and that Coloradans deserve a vote on its removal. This important limit sets us apart from states like California with its massive deficit and runaway spending. When our economy recovers, if this limitation is removed, our state government will be able to grow without limits.

It is time for the politicians in Denver to finally see that this kind of irresponsibility hurts our state. It's time for our leaders to show some restraint.

Janice Taylor, Colorado Springs