SandBox Comments: Aspen Times/Maurice Emmer "City of myths"

Exactly, says, 'SandBox Nanny'.

We just said that in the last post.  Thank you to Maurice Emmer of Aspen for dispeling the myths.

"Is this a city to be governed by myths or truth? Do you care whether election integrity can be verified? Do you wonder whether government knows your vote? Consider the facts, then make your views known. It is your city. Think, and then act..."
(Maurice Emmer)

(Read more?  Click title.  Comment to start discussion)

"Truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident."

SandBox Comments: Aspen Daily News "Learn the facts"

" When the appeals court recently ruled that voted anonymous ballots are indeed public records, instead of enabling and engaging public comment and expert opinion on whether or not to appeal the decision to the Colorado Supreme Court, City Council held a secret meeting.

In this meeting they “directed” Aspen’s city attorneys, who both have massive conflicts of interest, to potentially spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to fight the ruling,  — after all, it was Marilyn Marks who brought the original suit.

Meanwhile, Aspen’s bi-partisan Election Commission will be democratically engaging the public on Tuesday, Nov. 1 at 4 p.m. in council chambers to discuss the ruling and the issues at stake for Aspen should the city (read: Mick) pursue a legal battle with statewide implications on election integrity.

Mick and his councilmen seem to prefer sending the not-so-subtle message that “City Hall knows how you vote.”

Marilyn, on the other hand, along with Colorado’s election activists and most citizens say, “No one, especially the government, should know how anyone votes.”

Be there. Learn the facts. Join the discussion."

Elizabeth Milias
Aspen

"Truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident."

SandBox Comments: Aspen Times/Letter to the Editor "Does city have a secret?"

"After the City Council has repeatedly refused to allow an agenda item and public comment on the decision, the Election Commission scheduled a public dialogue for 4 p.m. on Nov. 1 in the City Council chambers. All City Council members and the public have been encouraged to attend by Election Commissioner Ward Hauenstein...."
(Marilyn Marks)

Provocative wording?    Yes.

Makes her point well and you're listening to her?  You betcha.

Liked by most readers?  Doesn't matter.

Worthy cause?  Debatable.  Most think very worthy.

Deserves to be ridiculed, defamed, slandered, shunned and abused with verbal assaults?  No.

Political activist making great strides in catalyzing entrenched issues within local, state and national  politics?  Yes and doing a terrific job worthy of high praise.

Needs to be personally liked or socially acceptable to the majority in order to do  that terrific job?
Nope.  But should  be.

Any of the above can be said about Marilyn Marks.

What's important in this post is the information on the Nov. 1, 2011 community input meeting.

Because if you have something to say about Marilyn Marks?

Please go say it there or cease and desist the public onslaught of defamation or slander against her.

just sayin.

(Read more?  Click title and comment to start discussion)

SandBox Comments: Aspen Daily News/Letter to the Editor " What is there to hide?"

"Well, here we go again. The City Council of Aspen has decided to appeal the ballot ruling. This is predictable and comical. What has become Aspen’s ultimate urination contest (this is a family newspaper) is back and swinging. Mayor Mick and city attorney John Worchester have persuaded the council members to use the tax payers money to appeal this ruling, either to get back at Marilyn Marks or to hide what could be an embarrassing and/or possibly a sinister situation.

The city could just walk away from the Colorado Court of Appeals decision, let Marks get her peak and be done with all this (that is of course if she doesn’t find something). I believe the city is hiding something. Why make this appeal? Is the city guilty of wrong doing or maybe they have destroyed the ballots?

The city has expended tax dollars in the original appeal and had to pay Mark’s attorney fees due their loss. Now they are going to spend more tax dollars and if they lose this round or the Colorado Supreme Court decides not to hear the case, the city will be out that money and will most likely have to pay Mark’s attorney fees again. Both sides have to spend money on attorneys regardless of the supreme court hearing the case or not.

Mayor Mick and the city believes that our tax dollars are their personal slush fund and this scenario is yet another example of their waste. It is time to wake up and stop this ridiculous expenditure. Lets try to spend our tax dollars on responsible projects and not wasteful boondoggles like frivolous lawsuits."
(James H. Perry )

(Learn more?  Click title or comment to start discussion)
"Truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident."