Open letter to CWA fans
Dear CWA Fans, I write with some unfortunate news. On Sunday, the Boulder Daily Camera featured, on its front page, what by all lights was a very negative story about the CWA. One of the things highlighted in the article was a letter that some CWA committee members and other individuals signed and sent to CU’s Chancellor DiStefano on April 2. In addition to doubting my leadership, that letter called into question the university’s commitment to keeping the CWA free and open to the public and to preserving our tradition of featuring participants who do not reside in Colorado.
After speaking with several of the letter’s signatories yesterday, it is clear to me that their primary motivation in signing the letter (while acknowledging that others may have had a different goal in mind) was to underscore the importance of the fundamental principles above. I want to take this opportunity to explicitly state to you all my position on these two issues.
I fully subscribe to the principle that the conference should remain free and open to the public. There are no plans to change the practice of the conference being free and open to the public, and I have no desire to change that longstanding practice. Moreover, given my high level of confidence in our ability to raise a good deal more revenue in years to come, I see no urgency to revisit this principle. If the very survival of the conference was at stake many years from now and the only viable option to allow it to continue was to charge admission, I think we’d have to consider that option as a CWA community.
Next, our participants come from out of state, and I firmly believe that there is real value in that. In fact, I’d like to identify ways to attract more participants to the conference from other countries to enhance our diversity of perspectives. The conference has achieved a very high level of success under the current model. Any discussion to alter this, or any other, traditions of the conference even in the most gradual way will be a discussion that takes place over a long period of time, it will consider all the advantages and disadvantages of the status quo, and all conference stakeholders will have the opportunity to be heard. After these deliberate, careful, and open discussions if there is broad consensus that the status quo does not need tweaking, I would be reluctant, to say the least, to act otherwise.
If you have follow up questions on these issues, or other concerns about the CWA, please do not hesitate to e-mail me any time at John.Griffin@Colorado.edu.
John D. Griffin/director, Conference on World Affairs
More magic from Kesem
On behalf of myself and the Camp Kesem CU Boulder staff, we would like to thank you for the truly amazing article about our organization, featured in Boulder Weekly [Re: “The magic of Kesem,” News, March 26]. Not only was it beautifully written, but it shed a light on the work that we do, our purpose, and who these families are and what they experience. Furthermore, you portrayed both who we are, and our words in such a positive light.
The fact that you were able to feature it as a full-length article is incredible, and we could not be more thrilled. Thank you so much for your time, for hearing our story, and sharing the magic of Kesem.
I know this will touch families and reach those it may otherwise not have. We sincerely appreciate your work, thank you.
Danea Sharp/Boulder
Good shot Leland
Leland Rucker got an arrow-splitting bull’s eye [Re: “‘Gazette’ cannabis package serves up purple haze,” Weed Between the Lines, Apr. 2] exposing the dark cannabis prohibition underbelly. Fortunately, Colorado citizens heard it all before and voted.
Truthfully, Stan White/Dillon, Colo.
Celebrate carbon dioxide?
Marsh Riggs was correct on several points today [Re: “Celebrate Carbon Dioxide,” letter to the editor in Daily Camera, March 31]. Firstly, Riggs states that less than 2 percent of the energy on the planet comes from wind and solar energy.
True, but he failed to note that energy from photovoltaic panels increased 485 percent since 2010 and wind energy is growing at an annual rate of 21 percent and we don’t have to eliminate fossil fuels entirely to reduce CO2 to acceptable levels.
Secondly, Mr. Riggs suggests that we should rejoice about the fact that there is carbon dioxide in the air. That is fine but it is disproportionally increasing due to man’s activities to levels that have not been seen in a million years and are already causing ice to melt at alarming rates at the poles and unseen droughts in many areas including New Mexico and California. These trends, as predicted previously by climate scientists, will continue to increase in intensity, destroying the delicate balance that was in place until the mid-20th century after the industrial revolution and the exponential use of fossil fuels went global.
Lastly, Riggs mentioned that believers in climate change had vested interests. Yes we do. We are interested in avoiding sea levels rising a foot by midcentury and up to five feet by the end.
We are interested in curbing the disturbing increasing acidity of our carbon dioxide absorbing oceans. We are interested in reducing the number of species that are becoming extinct due to global warming and we are interested in leaving our descendants a habitable planet.
Tom Lopez/Longmont
Respond: letters@boulderweekly.com
