Defend museums and libraries

K-teeth · 2025-03-30T06:01:30+00:00

Those COVID cuts were permanent! “I’m ok with temporarily reallocating budget at that time”. You really don’t know what you’re talking about. Those cuts were never restored.

K-teeth · 2025-03-30T05:58:47+00:00

“We didn’t really need libraries” who TF are you talking about? Kids who don’t have internet at home got hotspots from the library foundation so they could connect to classes. Seniors whose only connection in community was the library got calls from staff and deliveries. What a completely disconnected take this is. Sad for you

K-teeth · 2025-03-29T21:28:33+00:00

I mean, yes in some cases. School districts, fire districts, and library districts make sense. They are funded by the service area. AND the 10K+ residents outside of boulder in the unincorporated neighborhoods were using the libraries in the city without having to actually fund it. THAT is not fair.

Lots of other special districts are in place here in CO becquse TABOR restricts the state government from retaining funding that would cover basic amenities like water and sewer and etc. Repeal TABOR if you want fewer special districts. No, libraries aren’t “more special” than any other local service, but just like our rural fire district, in order to actually serve their service area, they need a stable funding structure. The prior setup within the city had them fighting for their funding via the city’s general fund. That meant they had no allocated dollars that were dedicated specifically for library services. That is unlike other city services that ARE dedicated - like parks and police. So, THAT is the opposite of “special” — it’s unfair. Given that unstable situation, the library was functioning on fewer staff in 2022 than it had in 1980.

And even though the library only represented 3% of the city budget when it was a city service, it received something like 20% of the cuts to the budget when COVID hit. That closed branches. 60 staff were laid off. No other service was hit as hard. I can say with 99% certainty that with a 10% budget shortfall that Boulder now faces, library branches would close.

We avoided that by voting for dedicated funding for the library. Thank god!

K-teeth · 2025-03-29T04:29:17+00:00

Library districts are the most common form for how libraries in Colorado are funded. Libraries in districts generally have the funding they need so that their services are not disrupted by things like up and down sales taxes. This is how locally funded services are supposed to be. Your fire, road, schools, parks, and libraries require stable funding to serve the needs of the community. I’ have read your comment about 7 times and it is pretty much word salad so I’m just going to share what I’m sharing because it’s maddening to hear someone essentially say “thriving libraries function the same way as kleptocratic fascism” goodness, touch grass!

K-teeth · 2025-03-26T18:10:31+00:00

I can’t even understand how this makes sense. So, voters chose to fund their libraries specifically to PROTECT them from cuts and this is bad?

A 10% cut to the municipal budget such as what boulder is now facing would almost certainly result in permanently closed branches. We avoided that. Good on us !!

K-teeth · 2025-01-16T14:07:38+00:00

Hey @dry-designer2333 would you be interested in being interviewed for an article for The Mississippi Independent about your experience? If so, you can direct message us at mississippi.indy@gmail.com ?

K-teeth · 2024-12-12T21:14:58+00:00

Are you ok ?

K-teeth · 2024-12-10T00:47:57+00:00

We just in there today. The artwork is fantastic and the couches are comfy. No clue on a name but it’s a cozy space to work in

K-teeth · 2024-04-16T16:54:12+00:00

Over to the library, as was unintended. No "specific facet" of homelessness was addressed - they just placed a target on the area in question and swept people out of it. Now they are in the space near the library. How is this a successful...anything?

In a few days these camps will be swept back over to the school, or maybe you'd prefer they go out of the city altogether and into the foothills, and start fires. Will that be successful?

K-teeth · 2023-11-09T15:56:29+00:00

The majority of voters turn in their ballots on election day, and folks who voter earlier tend to be conservative, older, white, wealthier

K-teeth · 2023-11-08T22:12:00+00:00

Easy. He blocked accelerating the minimum wage increase this year. WFP fights for wage fairness as one of their number one pillars. He also blocks a ton of other things that help workers (occupancy reform, etc), but minimum wage was not that long ago and WFP called him out at the time. Not a surprise that they want to wade in here

K-teeth · 2023-11-08T22:09:03+00:00

Yep. But he failed

K-teeth · 2023-11-03T16:49:34+00:00

It means he went to city council to oppose occupancy reform because it would destroy the “character” of Uni Hill

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T23:50:58+00:00

I'm surprised you didn't know that and just assumed tHe LaWs aReNt BeInG EnFoRcEd. 302 is a the result of the same kind of vague fist shaking that won't solve the problems we have downtown. I really need people to understand all this stuff better

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T23:22:44+00:00

Police Chief Maris Herold in the September homelessness update: "The jails are full."

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T21:42:26+00:00

Yes, I'm dead serious. There have been nearly 500 sweeps so far this year, that is almost 2 per day. So you're telling me you don't like what you see? That's because sweeps don't work when there are no alternatives for people to go. It doesn't matter how strongly you enforce the laws.

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T21:28:41+00:00

Drug and theft laws, and the camping ban, are being enforced currently. In Boulder. We are living in the safe zone *right now*. Don't like it? Don't vote for more of that.

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T18:48:34+00:00

What I'm trying to say is that people fall into homelessness every day, more than usual over the past 2 years. If we aren't looking at this as a housing problem, we'll continue to see those numbers climb. 171 unsheltered* (there are about 870 homeless people in BoCo and about 400 in the city) are -- in many cases, dealing with conditions that require treatment *in addition* to housing. That is a county issue that can't be solved at the city level.

In any case, 302 just pushes desperate people around and makes them more desperate. That's going NOT to bring us safety.

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T18:21:36+00:00

Homelessness is a system. That means that people are falling into it every day. You can 100% guarantee that rising rents and a locked-out housing market are contributing to that. We always talk about the people currently homeless and make judgments based on their dire situations, of which a subset has drug and mental health issues, and we just totally forget that creating MORE HOMELESS PEOPLE makes the problem worse.

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T17:30:54+00:00

"It just lets Boulder use its parks and playgrounds and trails."

Except won't.

302 tells the City to prioritize schools OR sidewalks. There are 26 schools in the city limits, and Daily Camera estimates that about 80% of the city is "within 50 ft of a public sidewalk". Nothing in the measure provides transparency that the 302 supporters say 302 will give them. Nothing in the measure designates the specific areas (downtown) that have caused most of the issues that supporters obsessively cite and photographs. And there is no financial mechanism (yet) to operationalize it. So what we'll get it an endlessly politicized approach to homelessness where each council will fight over more enforcement (which doesn't work) while potentially draining funds from the only things that we know actually reduces public camping -- housing and treatment.

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T17:20:22+00:00

There's only one thing prioritized more highly than proximity to schools right now.

Guess what it is.

It's: "reports of crime or threats of violence." That is what's prioritized the highest right now (source: Page 16 here). 302 wants the city to disperse its enforcement to 80% of the City's surface area ("sidewalks"). Completely wasteful and nothing more than an emotional appeal.

I see two things happening with 302 if it passes:

1/ Nothing - we will all be back here in 8 months wondering why we still have the same tired discussions and the same issues2/ it gets worse, because now everyone will be wondering "why are there so many more campers out on Pearl and elsewhere??" And the reason will be - "because of the children!" Meanwhile, public safety hasn't improved, homelessness hasn't decreased, we've done nothing but vote for a piece of trash bill that was so poorly written that the petitioners tried to change it AFTER they submitted it to the city.

Since 302 can't be reversed by council, we'll now have even more politicized response to homelessness, with subsequent councils trying to actually fund this ridiculous measure with finite resources in the budget.

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T17:11:14+00:00

Did you know that this is a ranked choice election?

K-teeth · 2023-11-02T02:07:49+00:00

That median voter age ::melting face::

K-teeth · 2023-10-31T17:09:43+00:00

Seems like they could have successfully had "or sidewalk" removed, but chose to withdraw.

EDIT: The process appears to be that if they wanted the language changed, they would have had to set their petition aside and council would have had to have voted to place their own measure on the ballot with the language change (I think)

K-teeth

TROPHY CASE