Tom Mooney: CU South: City Council continues to disappoint on University Hill
Thanks to Julie Marshall for her honest response to Boulder City Councilmember Rachel Friend’s request for a retraction and an apology (“A ‘robust correction’ well not exactly, Aug. 28). I wish I had time to review the social media posts by the city councilperson that led up to Marshall’s response. I suspect this was a tempered response to provocative postings.
As a longtime University Hill resident, I have been disappointed in the representation the City Council has given me on issues that affect The Hill. They have only provided me lip service, and then proceeded with their original agenda, serving the wants and needs of their bedfellows, developers and CU.
These are the “constituents” that the Boulder City Council values, as they have the impact on the community the council values: cash in lieu and deep pockets. The way the Boulder City Council is handling CU South is no different.
While sarcasm may be considered “the lowest form of humor” or “the weapon of the weak,” I consider this sort of reaction to be better than an intellectual tirade and far more enjoyable to read.
Given the reaction I see in the paper, it woke people up a little!
Bill Howe: CU South: Opinion piece compels response
It’s been quite a few years since I’ve taken the trouble to write to the Camera, not since the original traffic circles were being added (happily) to our city streets. However, this opinion piece compels me to write.
I have no strong views on the disquiet between Julie Marshall and Rachel Friend, but this article is perhaps the most poorly conceived and even more poorly executed “professional” opinion piece I think I’ve encountered. I’m tempted to list all of its issues (the most obvious being its outright condescension and juvenile sarcasm), but I think the article stands as its own indictment.
Whatever has gone wrong to allow such a wretched piece of prose to sully our local newspaper, please fix it and soon.
Eric T. Gertler: CU South: Point-by-point debate might aid understanding
As a longtime resident of Boulder (26 years now!) I remember when the city took a pass on buying what we now refer to as the “CU South Campus” property, apparently hoping to get a better price. When CU completed the strategic acquisition, I told my friends that Boulder residents would be lying down in front of the bulldozers before they allowed the university to build anything. So here we are.
I feel that I’ve made a good effort to follow this issue, but I’ve read Julie Marshall’s “editorial” three times this morning, and I’m just so confused.
Perhaps if I were a Twitter follower of this subject I’d have clarity on this matter, but that’s a sacrifice I’m not willing to make. At any rate, I am curious to understand whatever points Ms. Marshall is seeking to make in what appears to be a personal communication to Rachel Friend.
Perhaps a point-by-point debate would serve this purpose. Newspapers tend to be great forums for this type of communication.
Eric T. Gertler
Allan Brayley: CU South: Commentary damages credibility
That the Daily Camera would allow Opinion Page Editor Julie Marshall to launch a personal attack on Boulder Councilmember Rachel Friend in the pages of the Camera is astounding. That Ms. Marshall would write such a smug, condescending, mean-spirited and puerile diatribe is appalling. That Ms. Marshall owes Councilmember Friend a personal apology, and that the Camera owes its readers a public one, is without question.
But for this longtime reader of the Camera that is not enough. Ms. Marshall should resign, as should whoever approved the publication of this despicable piece. The credibility of the Camera’s opinion page hangs in the balance because with Ms. Marshall at the helm, it has none.
David McGuire: CU South: Voices of experts, residents are missing
Regarding Julie Marshall’s commentary (8/28/21, A ‘robust correction’ well not exactly), Julie has certainly exposed herself in her tantrum piece as to who was consulted for her “opinion” editorial.
Julie’s list of influencers reads like a Who’s Who of CU anti-annexation drivers. There’s not one mention of communication with City Council, city utilities experts, citizen experts like Dan Johnson (former WRAB Chair), any of the expert consultants who have advised the city on this project, and the list goes on. Not even one comment from we residents who directly dealt with the horror of the 2013 flood and who have been advocating for flood protection for the past eight years.
That’s what editorials are about: collecting/considering the facts, usually from a couple of sides, and rendering an opinion. Not searching for those with opinions that corroborate your own.
You’ve embarrassed yourself, journalism and the Daily Camera.
former Boulder resident who lived on Qualla Drive, victim of 2013 flood