From contract renewal to suspension

Recent commentary regarding Academy District 20 has tried to frame Superintendent Jinger Haberer’s removal as another ideological battle over books, parental rights, and student name-change policies. But the larger issue facing District 20 is much simpler, and far more important to taxpayers and families who support the district.

The public still does not know how the district moved from extending the superintendent’s contract through 2028 to placing her on administrative leave just four months later. In January, the board approved a contract extension. Then, over the course of May, the district entered a rapid series of executive sessions involving legal advice, personnel matters, and superintendent evaluations. By May 14, the superintendent had been placed on leave. Days later, the district was preparing to appoint an acting superintendent.

Perhaps every procedural requirement was technically followed. But legality alone does not create public trust. Citizens are not asking to see confidential personnel files or privileged legal advice. They are asking a basic question: how did the district’s top administrator go from contract renewal to suspension with so little public explanation? That question matters because taxpayers often end up paying for leadership turmoil through buyouts, severance agreements, outside counsel, investigations, and administrative turnover.

There is room for reasonable disagreement about student-name policies, parental rights, and library books. Parents absolutely should have involvement in what their own children read, and districts should carefully balance parental rights, student privacy, and state law. But those debates should not distract from the unresolved questions of transparency surrounding the district’s leadership crisis.

The real story in District 20 is whether the public’s business is being conducted with the transparency, accountability, and fiscal responsibility taxpayers deserve from elected officials and public institutions alike.

Emily Vonachen

Colorado Springs

Waste of rate-payer dollars

I was disgusted to hear that the Colorado Springs City Council (d.b.a the utilities board) voted unanimously to give the CEO of Colorado Springs Utilities an obscene pay raise – $150,000 over two years. What a waste of our municipal dollars!

CSU is not an energy company like Excel so we should not pay the chief at the same rate. It is a municipal agency that should reflect the economic situation of the city it serves.

Further, his leadership does not deserve such a raise. He has led the utility to abandon the much-needed diversification of our energy supplies. He insists on increasing water diversions and expanding the Montgomery Reservoir. Both priorities are futile – we cannot afford more fossil fuels if you consider the long-term impacts, and (as this winter has demonstrated) there will be no water to divert by the time they get that dam built. It is a complete waste of our rate-payer dollars.

I’m disappointed in all of the Council Members.

Jennifer DeWoody

Colorado Springs

A ‘new chapter‘

Over the last year, The Place, Colorado Springs’ primary resource and advocate for youth experiencing homelessness and housing instability, has been through a period of significant transition. Like many organizations, we experienced funding shifts and leadership changes that challenged us to take a hard look at how we serve our community.

We chose to view those challenges as an opportunity to sharpen our focus. Today, I am proud to share that The Place is not just back on its feet—we are thriving. By narrowing our mission to Housing, Outreach, and our Drop-In Center we now have110 youth housed, with The Launchpad, our 50-unit recently opened housing facility, filled to capacity. Our Drop-In Center is also seeing almost three times the youth in its new downtown location.

Our “new chapter” is a direct result of the patience and loyalty of this community. To our volunteers, donors, and neighbors: thank you for sticking with us while we did the hard work of restructuring.

We are more committed than ever to igniting the potential in youth to exit homelessness and create self-determined, fulfilled lives. With new leadership; CEO Chris Johnson, Development Director MaryFrances Kerr, Finance Director Kevin Linzey, along with season veteran Program Leaders Allison Ometer and Peggy Byrd, the future is in good hands. We look forward to you joining us at our annual “Off the Street” breakfast event coming up July 23rd to see our progress firsthand. The best is truly yet to come.

Chris Johnson and Wayne C Bland

Colorado Springs

Discrepancies in the 2020 election

The 2020 election was marked by Joe Biden’s decisive victory. Despite his low-key campaign style, questions arose about the integrity of the process, especially since mail-in ballots were run through imported voting machines. Dissent over the election results was quickly labeled criminal, creating a climate where questioning the outcome was discouraged and even punished.

In 2020, concerns over voting machines in Colorado and their results led Mesa County official Tina Peters to seek independent verification. Her actions challenged the narrative, prompting criminal charges. However, her prosecution and nine-year sentence suggest that those in power prioritized maintaining established accounts over openness, raising questions about the law’s true application. She was seen as leading the way for others to seek the discrepancies in the 2020 election.

The irony is that Trump losing the 2020 election and then returning to win in 2024 made it clear to everyone. It was a blessing in disguise that contrasts the Democrats’ machine against Donald Trump’s pragmatism. Sadly, the win opened up more real estate in his opponent’s heads. Discussion is not a Democrat’s option. They’re in denial and seeking one-party rule.

Tina Peters’ nine-year sentence ensures her to remain notorious past the 2028 election. A shortened sentence makes her extended notoriety disappear. Objections to a shortened sentence reveal the motive behind them: to discredit her or anyone of her prominence.

Fred Stewart

Grand Junction