User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Press Release (City of Colorado Springs)

Based upon increased fire activity, very high fire danger, current fire weather conditions and consultation and coordination of federal, state and local fire agencies, it is determined that Burn Restrictions are warranted in the City of Colorado Springs.
 
Pursuant of the 2009 International Fire Code the Fire Marshal has implemented Burn Restrictions for the City of Colorado Springs that shall prohibit the following activities:
 
1.      Recreational fires are not allowed.  A recreational fire is an outdoor fire for cooking, warmth, religious, or other special purposes that is not contained in a permanent fixture (incinerator, manufactured outdoor fireplace or pit, BBQ grill).

2.      Bonfires are not allowed.

3.      No smoking in any city parks/open spaces while burn restrictions are in place.

4.      Blasting, welding, and torches by permit only.

5.      Model rockets by permit only.

6.      Open or prescribed burning is not allowed (ditch burning, fires for silviculture, range or wildfire management).
 
Burn Restriction and Burn Ban Penalties - Person(s) failing to comply with a Burn Restriction or Burn Ban shall be punished in accordance with the Code of the City of Colorado Springs as amended (1.1.201). A careless fire that threatens or damages property is fourth degree arson and shall be prosecuted as such. For more information on burn restriction: https://csfd.coloradosprings.gov/sites/csfd.coloradosprings.gov/files/outdoor_burning14jul16.pdf
 
The Burn Restrictions shall take effect immediately upon the issuance of this order and shall remain in effect until such time the restrictions are modified.
 
Residents are encouraged to “Share the Responsibility” and reduce their wildfire
risk by implementing wildfire mitigation concepts into their landscaping. https://csfd.coloradosprings.gov/page/wildfire-mitigation

User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

by Ed Duffy

Chuck Guttierez, owner of Rockwood Landscaping in Colorado Springs, like to fix things. He’s quite an artist when it comes to landscaping. He’s also a handyman and an inventor.

Chuck Guttierez



One of the tools of his trade is the chain saw. Chuck noticed some deficiencies with the product so, he fixed them. He’s been refining his solution for years and now has his own patented product: Chain Protect.

Chuck explains, “Chain protect is a safe and inexpensive way to maintain your chainsaw. Chain Protect was designed to make bucking firewood, chain sharpening, bar adjustment and starting your chainsaw an easier chainsaw experience.”

The simple, ingenious and patented device attaches via the hole in the end of the chain saw bar. Tighten it in the straight out position to avoid kick back when trimming branches. Tighten it in the “kickstand” position to hold the saw in place while sharpening your blade or while starting your saw. It also keeps your blade from touching the ground while in use, which can dull your blade faster and shorten its life. Chain Protect can also protect against a disengaged chain. The chain will wrap around the Chain Protect unit rather than flying back and injuring the user.

You can find Chain Protect online at www.ChainProtect.com for $19.99 with free shipping.

The video below shows exactly how it’s installed and used. For more information you can also call 719-661-0449 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive
by John Stossel

    Has the media gotten worse? Or am I just grouchier?
    Every day I see things that are wrong or that so miss the point I want to scream.
    Four examples:

Storm Coverage
    As this week's storm approached the East Coast, the media reverted to breathless hype: "monster storm ... very dangerous." Here I blame my beloved free market: Predicting scary weather works. Viewers tune in.
    What galls me more is the reporters' government-centric thinking. "Everything is closed," they say. "Employees can't get to work."
    But the corner grocery stayed open. So did many gas stations and restaurants.
    Why is it that when government buildings close, so many private businesses stay open? Because their own money is at stake.
    The store's employees probably make less money than government workers. They are less likely to own all-wheel-drive cars. But they get to work. Some sleep there. Their own money is on the line.
    Reporters don't think about the distinction.

The Deep State
    Monday, The New York Times ran the headline "What Happens When You Fight a 'Deep State' that Doesn't Exist?"
    The article explained that unlike Egypt or Pakistan, America doesn't really have a powerful deep state, and to claim that it does "presents apolitical civil servants as partisan agents."
    Give me a break. "Apolitical civil servants"?
      A deep state absolutely exists. Some call it "administrative state" or "regulatory state." These are the people who crush innovation and freedom by issuing hundreds of new rules. Regulators, if they don't pass new rules, think they're not doing their job.
    Even "anti-regulator" President George W. Bush hired 90,000 new regulators. Calling them "nonpartisan" doesn't make them harmless -- it just means we put up with them through multiple administrations.
    Even if you exclude the military and post office, more than 20 million Americans work for the government. Because of civil service rules, it's almost impossible to fire them.
    The Times calls these 20 million people "apolitical". Please. Most are just as partisan as you or I. Maybe more so, as leaks and signs of bureaucratic resistance to presidential edicts demonstrate.
    People who choose to work for, say, the EPA, tend to be environment zealots. This should surprise no one. Somehow, New York Times reporters don't see it.

"Chief of EPA Bucks Studies"
    Speaking of the EPA and the Times, their front page claimed President Donald Trump appointee Scott Pruitt is "at odds with the established scientific consensus." That makes Pruitt sound like an anti-science idiot. But the headline is bunk.
    Pruitt only said that he does not agree that man is "the primary contributor to global warming."
    That's "at odds" with Times reporters and government flunkies on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but many scientists say there is so much uncertainty to climate measurements that no one can know if man's greenhouse gases are the "primary" cause of warming.
    The earth warmed similarly last century, well before we emitted so much carbon dioxide.

John Oliver
    British comedian John Oliver hosts one of the better political talk shows. He's like Bill Maher but funnier and not as mean. Yesterday, on an airplane, I watched an episode that led with a report on the chaos in Venezuela.
    I perked up, expecting Oliver to at least mention Venezuela's caps on corporate profits, abolition of property rights, media censorship, regulation of car production "from the factory door to the place of sale," etc. In other words: socialism.
    But no, Oliver didn't mention any of that.
    He mocked President Maduro's speeches but said Venezuela was in trouble because its economy depends on oil and oil prices dropped. What?
    Kuwait, Nigeria, Angola and other countries exported more oil than Venezuela. But they survived the price drop without experiencing the misery that Venezuela suffers. The suffering was created by socialism.
    America's leftists cannot see the horrors of socialism even when they are right in front of them.
    John Stossel is the author of "No They Can't! Why Government Fails -- But Individuals Succeed." For other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2017 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive
by Walter E. Williams

    Most Americans, whether liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican, do not show much understanding or respect for the principles of personal liberty. We criticize our political leaders, but we must recognize that their behavior simply reflects the values of people who elected them to office. That means we are all to blame for greater governmental control over our lives and a decline in personal liberty. Let me outline some fundamental principles of liberty.

    My initial premise is that each of us owns himself. I am my private property, and you are yours. If we accept the notion of self-ownership, then certain acts can be deemed moral or immoral. Murder, rape and theft are immoral because those acts violate private property. Most Americans accept that murder and rape are immoral, but we are ambivalent about theft. Theft can be defined as taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another, to whom it does not belong. It is also theft to forcibly use one person to serve the purposes of another.

    At least two-thirds of federal spending can be described as Congress' taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another American, to whom it does not belong. So-called mandatory spending totaled $2.45 trillion in 2015. Thus, two-thirds of the federal budget goes toward Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, food assistance, unemployment and other programs and benefits that fall into the category of taking from some and giving to others. To condemn legalized theft is not an argument against taxes to finance the constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government; we are all obligated to pay our share of those.

    Many say that government spending guarantees one right or another. That's nonsense. True rights exist simultaneously among people. That means the exercise of a right by one person does not impose an obligation on another. In other words, my rights to speech and travel impose no obligations on another except those of noninterference. For Congress to guarantee a right to health care, food assistance or any other good or service whether a person can afford it or not does diminish someone else's rights -- namely, their right to their earnings. Congress has no resources of its very own. If Congress gives one person something that he did not earn, it necessarily
requires that Congress deprive somebody else of something that he did earn.

    Another area in which there is contempt for liberty, most notably on many college campuses, is free speech. The true test of one's commitment to free speech does not come when he permits others to say things with which he agrees. Instead, the true test comes when one permits others to say things with which he disagrees. Colleges lead the nation in attacks on free speech. Some surveys report that over 50 percent of college students want restrictions on speech they find offensive. Many colleges have complied with their wishes through campus speech codes.

    A very difficult liberty pill for many Americans to swallow is freedom of association. As with free speech, the true test for one's commitment to freedom of association does not come when one permits people to voluntarily associate in ways that he deems acceptable. The true test is when he permits people to associate in ways he deems offensive. If a golf club, fraternity or restaurant were not to admit me because I'm a black person, I would find it offensive, but it's every organization's right to associate freely. On the other hand, a public library, public utility or public university does not have a right to refuse me service, because I am a taxpayer.

    The bottom line is that it takes a bold person to be for personal liberty, because you have to be able to cope with people saying things and engaging in voluntary acts that you deem offensive. Liberty is not for wimps.

    Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM

User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive

Press Release (RedEnergyPR.com)

Center for Nonprofit Excellence (CNE) recently appointed Abby Sienkiewicz as the new Executive Director.

Sienkiewicz has been involved with CNE for more than 10 years, most recently as Interim Executive Director and Deputy Director.

“When you have passion and talent within your organization, naming a new leader becomes easy, said Susan Davies, CNE Board Chair. “Abby seamlessly moved from Deputy Director to Interim Director of CNE and has quickly proved to members of the board that she is the right choice, said Davies. "Abby and her staff have a vision for CNE that will propel our sector to new heights.

”A Michigan native, Sienkiewicz moved to Colorado in 2006 to serve the Girl Scouts through an AmeriCorps Fellowship which was managed through CNE. During her AmeriCorps Fellowship, Abby took full advantage of CNE’s programs, workshops, and networking opportunities to expand her understanding of the nonprofit sector. She has developed arts education programs; helped start community gardens; managed building restoration with the State Historical Fund; and served as the Executive Director for FutureSelf.

Sienkiewicz was recently selected as one of the Independent Sector’s NGen Fellows, a highly competitive program for nonprofit and philanthropic leaders aged 40 or under, from around the country, and was chosen to participate in a year-long program to strengthen their capacity to increase impact in their local communities.  

Sienkiewicz holds degrees in family studies and holistic health care from Western Michigan University, where she firstexplored a career in the nonprofit sector through prevention education programs.