Schwenke is helping realtors and developers oppose City plan for more pedestrian & bike-friendly development

Many Grand Junction streets lack curb, gutters, sidewalks and other pedestrian and bike-friendly amenities. City Council is trying to fix this by making transportation corridors safer and more user-friendly for pedestrians, bicyclists and people using public transportation. Realtors and developers oppose the effort, assisted by former Chamber president Diane Schwenke.

Former Grand Junction Chamber of Commerce President Diane Schwenke, who has a consulting business now called “Schwenke Solutions,” is working as a consultant for the Grand Junction Area Realtors and Homebuilders Associations, helping them oppose the City’s new proposed Transportation Engineering Design Standards (TEDS) that are designed to make streets safer for pedestrians, bicyclists and people taking public transportation.

Diane Schwenke lobbies against higher wages

Former Grand Junction Chamber of Commerce President Diane Schwenke appears in a 2016 TV ad opposing an increase in Colorado’s minimum wage

To that end, Schwenke authored a strange letter to the editor to the Daily Sentinel November 26 that praised a new housing development on former farmland in Nebraska that lack curbs, gutters and walkable sidewalks. She praises the beautiful agricultural setting of the development, saying it has “a layout that maximizes the view of fields of corn and soybeans on the adjourning hillsides,” but doesn’t seem to understand that such developments destroy the lovely fields and farms she likes to look at, and will cost taxpayers in the long run as cities have to add curb, gutter, drainage, adequate sidewalks and other amenities to make them safer and more attractive.

Schwenke wrote the letter to help her realtor and developer clients oppose the new transportation design standards the City of Grand Junction is proposing that are aimed at improving safety and mobility for walkers and bikers. Plans include things like widening sidewalks from 4 ft. to 6 ft in subdivisions and require sidewalks on both side of many streets, designs to slow traffic down on smaller streets to make them safer, adding lighting to subdivisions and other tweaks that will make the City more pleasant and attractive to live in.

Realtors, developers and the G.J. Chamber of Commerce don’t want the changes in the new plan

Realtors and developers argue the changes will cost them more money, which they will pass on to homebuyers, make it harder to build housing developments and anyway people don’t complain about things like narrow sidewalks. The Chamber is taking their side.

But city planners back the new plan, saying say narrow sidewalks make it hard for two people to walk side by side, pass those who are pushing strollers or using wheelchairs, and that big mirrors on vehicles parked alongside narrow sidewalks encroach on pedestrians’ already small space and make it even smaller.

There are lots more interesting back and forth on comments about the specifics of the plan on the website GJSpeaks.org.

City Council has a hearing on the new TEDS proposal on Wednesday, December 6

A Grand Junction Chamber newsletter is urging its members to “Help the Government Affairs team fight GJ’s overpriced new planning regulations.”

Schwenke is helping realtors and developers fight these new standards.

In short, if you enjoy a town that is pedestrian and bicycle friendly and not just geared to vehicular travel everywhere, tell the city you support the new TEDS plan by leaving a recorded message on the City Council Comment line at (970) 244-1504, or by emailing City Council at council@gjcity.org

WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS – The developers on the far side of this street were required to put in curb, gutter and sidewalk alongside their subdivision, while the developer in the foreground (left) was only required to put a big concrete pipe under the subdivision entrance and gravel alongside the road, leaving taxpayers holding the bag to complete the drainage and sidewalk here in the years to come. City Council is trying to stop this kind of inconsistent, pedestrian-and-bike unfriendly development that will cost taxpayers more to remediate in the long run, and make sure new development is up to modern standards for safety and quality.

District 51 quietly working on plan that involves firing over 50 teachers in Fruita

Fruita 8/9 School, August 2022 (Photo: Facebook)

AnneLandmanBlog received the following communication this morning titled “A Huge Concern,” from a D-51 teacher who wants to get word out about the School District quietly moving forward with a plan to fire over 50 Fruita-area teachers, many of whom have over 20 years of experience:

What’s wrong with “Medicare Advantage” plans?

Frame from a TV ad by a local agency that sells Medicare Advantage plans

At this time of year, ads hawking “Medicare Advantage” plans flood every possible media outlet, imploring seniors to call 1-800 numbers and contact their local insurance brokers for “free Medicare evaluations” where brokers can sign them up for Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, also called Part C plans, that offer premiums a bit lower than traditional Medicare and freebies like vision screenings, dental cleanings, gym memberships and a monthly allowance to spend on drugstore merchandise.

These plans definitely sound alluring, but don’t be fooled.

Board of Public Health & county commissioners violated state public health law with their new intergovernmental agreement

Stephen D. Daniels, new Chair of the Mesa County Board of Public Health,  violated Colorado Title 25 by giving control over the health department’s budget to the elected county commissioners. No provision in the state public health law permits that.

When the Mesa County Commissioners had the Board of Health (BOH) sign their new Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), the commissioners, County Attorney Todd Starr and all 7 members of the new BOH all either knowingly or unknowingly violated Colorado Revised Statute Title 25, Article 1, Part 5(k).

KREX TV explores how the County seized control over all of Mesa County Public Health Department’s contracts when it only contributes 4.2% of the agency’s budget

KREX reporter Michael Loggerwell’s story about Mesa County’s new Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Health Department- Part 1

KREX-TV News recently did a two-part series about the Mesa County Commissioners’ new, post-Jeff Kuhr Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) that more tightly regulates the County’s relationship with the Public Health Department (MCPHD), and how it differs from the old 2012 agreement in important ways that could negatively affect public health and safety in the county.

Why are the Mesa County Commissioners sending taxpayer money out of town?

The Commissioners used a roofing company in Keenesburg, Colorado to replace the roof on the Old County Courthouse on Rood Ave., instead of a company located in Mesa County

The Mesa County Commissioners recently had the roof replaced on the Old Courthouse at 544 Rood Ave.

They gave the job to Better Line Roofing, LLC in Keenesburg, Colorado, 279 miles from here, instead of a local roofing company.

People concerned about D-51 Social Studies Forums Nov. 15 & 16

School District 51 is holding forums today and tomorrow (Wednesday, 11/15 and Thursday, 11/16) to discuss the state’s new social studies standards. The forums are today at Redlands Middle School and tomorrow at Orchard Mesa Middle School, from 5:30-8:30 p.m. each day.

So, what’s up with these forums?

Instructor salaries at CMU remarkably low compared to state and nation

Classified ad placed by Colorado Mesa University in the 11/12/23 issue of the Daily Sentinel for a tenure-track assistant professor of nursing

Colorado Mesa University (CMU) has been advertising for a tenure-track assistant nursing professor for its Montrose campus.

The position requires teaching 12 course credit hours each semester, or 24 credits over an academic year, which is considered a standard, full-time teaching load. Applicants must also have a current RN license, plus a minimum of two years of full time professional clinical experience and a graduate degree in nursing from a nationally accredited school of nursing, with a Ph.D. preferred, as well as other requirements.

But the pay is only $55,000 – 60,000 a year.