Property taxes and growth For what it’s worth, I don’t typically believe the state government of California will act smartly if given the choice. However, there are still many beautiful locations to live there, but most are far too expensive. Property taxes in the state of California are o r were used primarily to fund public education through the 12th grade. However, property values assessed by the respective counties skyrocketed in the 1960s and 1970s to the point where property taxes were commensurate with that growth, which drove many homeowners off their land and dwellings. Furthermore, the property tax rate from county to county might vary significantly. In a 1978 referendum, the voters of California passed Proposition 13 to limit the annual growth to property taxes to no more than 1% annually. This further meant the county valuation could not increase by more than 1% annually for any property privately owned, unless real property improvements were made to the specific parcel. Maybe it’s time to introduce an initiative of this nature in Colorado. Stephen Kelly Colorado Springs Hands off Greenland “We’ll worry about Greenland in about two months. Let’s talk about Greenland in 20 days.”. This was according to President Donald Trump, speaking aboard Air Force One on Sunday, January 4. My response to President Trump: Hands off Greenland! Greenland is a self-governing territory of Denmark — an ally, a sovereign country, and a fellow NATO member. The President’s renewed comments about annexation of Greenland have evoked condemnation from not only Denmark, but also European allies and other countries across the world. As Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen stated on Monday, “If the United States chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops,” including NATO. I can think of no better gift to the dictators across the globe (especially Russian President Putin) than this sort of discord between America and its allies. Suppose Spain (or Britain or France) decides that our management of Puerto Rico (a U.S. territory) has been substandard, and that securing the island enhances their security. How would we feel about them taking military action there? I suggest that our ever-slumbering Congress start to rein in the President by passing a resolution prohibiting such actions toward Greenland. This resolution needs to state that no military operation can be conducted against another NATO member without a prior Congressional declaration of war. If President Trump chooses to speak unwisely, let us at least keep him from being able to act on such talk. Randall Grant Widefield The endangered and the threatened The 1973 Endangered Species Act is a perfect metaphor for the way a good thing can lose its mission. Who doesn’t want to protect what we have inherited from disappearing? The original bill that protected the endangered also included the threatened species. Since 1973, the bill has grown from one page to 173 pages, without distinction between the endangered and the threatened. As Greg Walcher noted in the Daily Sentinel of Grand Junction, “That is one of the out-of-focus aspects of federal decisions that leave the issue blurry.” By the government adopting a “blanket rule” that applies the same standard to the whole list, critical distinction disappears. The ESA has become a political football. There are now efforts to rescind the blanket rule so that the economic and environmental elements can be objectively evaluated. As Walcher concludes, “It is rather a long-overdue response to a badly out-of -focus system, to provide a more clear picture of what is required and expected.” Transfer this thought to the government in general. Those who profit by or are ideologues of such a system are negligent, blind, or criminal. The mighty American Century that FDR built is now something he would admonish. Fred Stewart Grand Junction ...read more read less