My Publisher’s note from last week’s edition was met with mixed reviews as you can read in the Letters to the Editor this week. The finished paper is sent to our printer on Wednesday afternoons and my thoughts as well as placement may have changed a bit had we all known that Jenkins made the decision last Thursday after we went to print to pull their proposal presentation from Council’s agenda. I will acknowledge your feedback; the PPB will learn from our decision as to where we place articles in the paper. Yes, my front page note that prefaced Dave Jenkins’ letter to Manitou City Council on page 5 belonged on the Letters to the Editor page, where you now see this response.
I will however stand by our position that was eloquently expressed by our editor, Heila, from our July 5 edition: “We stand for equality here at the Bulletin. Every person gets a fair shake in these pages, and we will do what we can to see that everyone gets a fair shake outside of these pages, too, by continuing to shine a light on the stories of all our community members.”
I am hopeful that my words last week sparked more of our Manitou residents to want to know more and to engage in healthy community conversation. Last night’s City Council meeting in Manitou reflected my hopes. Many residents spoke to the essence of the Jenkins Proposal which we still to date have not seen nor experienced. We may never see it in the original iteration that they intended.
Most of the Tuesday evening Public Comment speakers expressed their opposition to a donation of property that comes with strings, a new road and possible parking lot. Most supported the 18+ acre donation if it was only for trails and open spaces. I too would personally lean toward that alternative. As we have reported in our front-page city council coverage, some speakers brought forth new ideas and calls for action. It was all very powerful and moving for me as an observer. The petition that has been circulating through Manitou now has well over 600 signatures of support. You can read more about the petition and so much more on the new “Friends of Ruxton Canyon” website: Ruxtonfriends.com. Check it out!
When I entered the room on Tuesday my eyes were first drawn to so many residents that turned out to speak and listen. In the back of the room, I was taken aback a bit by the presence of a uniformed armed police officer – an unfortunate vision of today’s national, state and local climate and ecosystem. Once civil discourse began, the officer was quickly dispensed. As I stated in my first sentence, my note was met with mixed reviews. One resident greeted me, smiled and thanked me for my words. Because of it, the resident and their spouse have made the decision to now become member subscribers to the PPB.
Folks, this story is not over. There will be more in next week’s edition as we examine this issue from all sides. Support your local news publication with a donation, member subscription or advertising. Support local journalism. Support the PPB’s efforts to preserve democracy.
JOIN THE COMMUNITY CONVERSATION
Please send your letters to the editor to heila@pikespeakbulletin.org, and include your first and last name as well as contact information. Please cite your sources for any statistics or other factual assertions. Letters under 500 words that do not need extensive fact-checking are a likely to be published.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Allen unsuitable for library position
[Editor’s Note: This letter is a response to the article “CO Springs librarians concerned over new HR director’s ties to anti-LGBT hate group” by Heidi Beedle, reprinted from the Colorado Times-Recorder, in our July 12 edition].
I totally appreciate the balanced reporting of the Bulletin. Regarding the story about Timothy Allen, I feel the library employees have valid reasons for concern. I hope this issue will resolve itself with Mr. Allen’s departure from his position. I would also like to know why the hiring of Mr. Allen for this position was not open to public comment prior to his hiring. It is, after all, a public library position. Why wasn’t the public allowed to weigh in?
As far as I can see, this is just another building block in the march by right-wing Christians to make this country Christian as it was in the “good old days.” It is time to halt this march at local levels where it should have been halted a decade ago.
This inappropriate appointment needs to be rescinded. Clearly, Mr. Allen’s background and openly expressed beliefs make him totally unsuitable for the position.
Judy Carnick
The little print taketh away
With regards to Norwood Development Group’s proposal to build a new road and parking lot in Manitou Springs, please consider:
The late John Prine said, “The big print giveth, the little print taketh away.” Wise words indeed. And in this case, the big print is, “WE’RE GOING TO GIVE YOU 18 ACRES TO BUILD A ROAD AND A PARKING LOT!”
And the little print is, “If you don’t get it done in three years, we’re gonna take it all back and do what we want with it. By then, we can build the road and parking lot without public resistance because the City would have already started the project. And since it will be a private development, we can decide who gets to use it, how much we charge people for using it, and keep all the money we make from it.”
Sound like a worthy deal to you? For a road we don’t need leading to parking lot we don’t want?
There are two other sayings that fit here too
“If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”
“Be careful what you wish for…”
Ed Parsons
Extreme disappointment
[Editor’s Note: We alerted the author of this letter that there were points that seemed to us to be made in confusion. She made a few changes and said she wanted the letter published as you see it here.]
Dear Lyn,
I have to go on record with you regarding my extreme disappointment regarding the near “love letter” quality of reporting that you provided in the Friday, July 12, 2024, edition of the Pikes Peak Bulletin (PPB) regarding Jenkins and their proposal to City Council to build a new road and new parking lot on the west side of Manitou Springs.
[Heidi Beedle wrote an article about the city council meeting; Lyn Ettinger-Harwell wrote a Publisher’s Note about the Jenkins. We stand by Beedle’s unbiased reporting. – ed]
In your piece, you note that you spoke to the Jenkins and found them to be very sincere and genuine in their offer to “donate” the 18-acre parcel to the city, due to their deep affection and “care” for the community. However, you failed to share any information about the stipulations they have attached to their supposed “donation.” Why is this??? This “gift” to the city comes with the stipulation that if the road/parking lot and associated infrastructure are not completed within 3 years, as directed by Jenkins, the 18 acres goes back to them, granting them free rein to develop this land as they please.
It also disappoints me that you sought out and sat down with Jenkins, the multi-millionaire developer, (who no longer lives here, by the way) but you couldn’t be bothered to interview any of the local citizens (who do live in Manitou Springs), who very quickly organized a grassroots movement to stop this initiative. Why is this??? You quote me in your article, but you did not speak with me. Those of us who live on the west side, and are citizens of Manitou Springs, deserved, at the very least, a tiny bit of your time and a “voice” in your PPB article, especially given the slanted nature of your reporting.
[Editor’s note: The author of this letter, Connie Brachtenbach, is not quoted in Ettinger-Harwell’s Publisher’s Note. She is quoted in Beedle’s article. The Jenkins did not speak with Beedle; Chris Jenkins spoke with Ettinger-Harwell. – ed]
Heidi Beedle, PPB’s brand-new journalist/social media manager (who admitted to me that she knows VERY LITTLE about Manitou Springs) spent about 20 minutes talking with me at my home, just before the July 9th City Council meeting. The only part of Heidi’s interview with me that she chose to put in the PPB, were the survey numbers. SERIOUSLY!?!?!
[Beedle also included information about Brachtenbach holding a community meeting, as well as a quote from Brachtenbach she “was asking for 1,500 people to show up” for the Jenkins presentation to city council. The Jenkins later cancelled the presentation. – ed]
Not a single, solitary word in her article about the numerous reasons why our grassroots group is opposed to the road and to the parking lot being built. Talking about the “why” of our grassroots movement…what we want (open space and accessible trails) and what we don’t want (more traffic, more pollution, new roads and new parking lots) is the only reason I agreed to the interview with Heidi.
Finally, you did a grave disservice to the actual people that got this grassroots movement started by stating, in your article, that I am the organizer of this effort. While I have been a strong voice in getting the word out to the citizens of Manitou Springs about Jenkin’s proposal, I am by NO MEANS the organizer of the “No Parking Lot, No Road” initiative. I was not part of the initial organizing meeting(s), did not attend the early City Council meetings that included discussion of Jenkins proposal and only just learned of this grassroots effort at the end of June.
[Brachtenbach was not named as “the” organizer. What the article says is, “Connie Brachtenbach, a longtime Manitou Springs resident, held a community meeting last month to organize residents against the proposal, which she argues will negatively impact nearby neighborhoods. Brachtenbach and a coalition of community members and organizers from the Friends of Ruxton Canyon, a group of Ruxton Avenue residents formed during the renovations of the Incline, have been canvassing and collecting survey data of their own.” – ed]
That being said, it is very important to me that Ila Quin, Linda Morlan, Kimberly de La Harpe, and Ken Jaray (and I am certain that there are many others who deserve acknowledgment as well) be given full credit for getting this effort off the ground. I am simply doing my best, as a citizen of Manitou Springs, to protect our beautiful community from Jenkins’ barely veiled efforts to open the west side of our town to rampant development that only he and the other millionaire/billionaire types, who are lurking in the background of Jenkins’ proposal, will benefit from. (I will allow the other parties to remain nameless because, let’s face it, we all know who they are!)
In closing, I would like to ask that you please revisit the Jenkins proposal and add the voices of the MANY (over 300) “No Parking Lot, No Road” Manitou Springs citizens who were NOT represented in your PPB ode to the “genuine intentions” that Jenkins and his family have for a town that they no longer live in. We, as citizens of Manitou Springs, deserve at least that much from your publication.
Sincerely,
Connie Brachtenbach
Poor show of leadership
To whom it may concern:
I am writing to you now as a lifelong citizen, born and raised, of Manitou Springs. The thought of a road and parking lot development on the mountainsides that I have run and explored my whole life is heartbreaking and absolutely unthinkable. It wreaks of parties interested only in what the land is worth monetarily in the moment rather than the generational and ecosystem impacts.
A significant amount of citizens share this sentiment and have made their stance incredibly clear to all parties involved. As a journalistic outlet, I would ask all of you working for and publishing this newspaper: what side of this issue do you want your legacy to be on? Do you want to be known as the newspaper that represented the citizens’ voices in their grassroots efforts to ensure the quality of life and of our town’s natural beauty or as the newspaper that half-heartedly represented the people and illuminated the developer parties with glowing words of affirmation, friendship, and reassurance of a good reputation?
It is a poor show of leadership and integrity for the publisher to showcase his own opinion writing on the front page of the newspaper and count that as an honest effort of representing all sides of this issue, while allowing citizens’ letters to the editor on this issue to be published in the assigned section. This is a poor representation of journalism.
I will ask you again, what side of this issue do you want your publication’s journalism to be on? Do you want your outlet to be remembered as one that disproportionately represents the parties that are interested in a land grab, using your authority, position, and reputation to sway the public view, or do you want to fairly and proportionately represent the community-led and -minded effort to preserve open space and halt the unsustainable development of our surrounding mountainsides? Your decision will have generational implications.
Respectfully,
Emma Witting
Very disappointed
[Editor’s note: The PPB has not received a donation from the Jenkins of any size.]
Dear Letter to the Editor Department,
I am very disappointed in the one-sided reporting on the Jenkins proposal for the land donation and new road and parking lot. This came across as a paid endorsement by Jenkins to push through this project with very limited reported viewpoints of the people who are against this proposal. This is not good journalism as the paper was unbiased and did not present arguments from both sides of the issue adequately. It makes me wonder if Jenkins made a sizable donation to the paper. If this is an opinion piece, then put it into the correct section of the paper.
Regards,
Keith Schoepflin
