John Spitzer: ‘OK Boomer’ pejorative has no place at Council

When I attempted to speak during Open Hearing at the Dec. 3 City Council meeting, I was bombarded behind me with large signs in the audience reading “Hey Boomer” and “OK Boomer” — in full view of the City Council and the TV audience.

For those not in know (as I wasn’t a couple weeks ago), “OK” or “Hey Boomer” is “a pejorative retort used to dismiss or mock perceived narrow-minded, outdated, negatively-judgemental, or condescending attitudes of older people, particularly baby boomers,” according to Wikipedia. Columnist Bob Lonsberry recently labeled “boomer” as the “n-word” of ageism.

Does “Hey” or “OK Boomer” have any place at City Council hearings, or any other place in the city? I think not. I have reason to believe that the use of this term has been promoted and/or encouraged by the so-called “progressives” in Boulder — the same “progressives” who called for diversity, equality and tolerance in our last election. Hypocrisy? I call on them to immediately notify friends and supporters to stop using “Hey Boomer” or “OK Boomer” in any manner.

While they may claim this is just a use of “free speech,” I see it as having a “chilling effect” on my free speech — I will not speak at Council again until such signs and speech are banned at City Council meetings and elsewhere across the city. We’ve got enough national dissension — it’s time that we accept and embrace all people across Boulder.

This may also be something that the newly-established GARE (“Government Alliance on Race and Equity”) ought to be looking at.

John Spitzer

Boulder

Don Tocher: Frustration with how we are governed

Spending about $100 million on electric municipalizatioin is mind-numbing. That’s about $1,000 for each of us. It is silly to buy and manage very complex resources that ratepayers have already largely paid for through Xcel’s charges for depreciating its assets. Then there’s the observation that the original vote in favor of the effort included college kids who were cajoled into voting for it and who largely will not ever have to pay anything toward it.

This prompted musing about how better to secure the environment with that kind of money. Note that there are about 20,000 individual residential dwellings in Boulder and they house about half the population. $50 million could subsidize solar power to about $2,500 per house. The other half could do likewise for commercial and apartment buildings. Doing so would of course have an immediate impact on carbon emissions.

The city’s response to the recent storm punctuates my frustration with how we are governed. Are there any neighborhoods in town that are not icy-rut infested? Perhaps those where the Council members live were plowed; oh, that’s a Chicago story!

Another policy move relates to immigration. According to cotap.org (Carbon Offsets to Alleviate Poverty) the annual carbon emissions per capita for the Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala) is about one ton per year, and that of India and Bangladesh, respectively, is 1.6 and 0.38 tons per year. In contrast, that of the United States is 17.5 tons per year. Obviously most people migrate to improve things for themselves economically and that means increasing their carbon footprints.

So, an effective policy to reduce carbon emissions would be to curtail migration from poor countries to wealthier ones. Better to move for more emancipation and education of women as well as helping with family planning.

Don Tocher

Boulder

Lise Menn: In defense of ‘Breaking Cat News’

I leap to the top of the bookcase to defend “Breaking Cat News.”

Maybe this gentle strip appeals mostly to cat people, but there are a lot of us out here. I depend on the acid brilliance of “Dilbert,” “Doonesbury,” “Non Sequitur” and their ilk in dealing with the “real” world. But “Breaking Cat News,” with its puzzled feline view of human enterprises, its (mostly) warm fuzzy embrace, its momentary cat spats, and its lyrical drawing style, counterpointed by strait-laced chyron banners, offers me a few moments of respite on a virtual sunny couch each morning.

Please keep this strip.

Lise Menn

Boulder

Julia Bickford: Phones are a distraction in the classroom

Cell phones do not belong in the classroom. Reducing access to technology in schools ensures that children are getting the most out of their education.

Boulder Valley School District is taking this first step. It is a privilege for students at BVSD to own cell phones. This privilege should not override the value of education. Implementing a cell phone ban is in the student’s best interest. Cell phones inhibit learning as they distract students from academic lessons. Children lose interest in what teachers have to say if they have the better option of entertaining themselves with their cell phones. With the elimination of cell phones, children will be more apt to learn, digest and utilize the crucial academic lessons teachers are presenting them with. Cell phones are only a form of distraction in schools; prohibiting cell phone use is a change that needs to be made so students can take full advantage of their education.

According to a 2019 survey by Kaitlin Hurtado, children use their phones 60% of the time for non-academic purposes. It is proven that students are not using their cell phones in school to further their education, rather they distract them from it. Banning cell phone use will eliminate this problem. Being knowledgable about the uses of cell phones is essential, as these decisions will impact the future of children and their relationship with education.

Schools in Boulder implementing this ban will create a domino effect. After seeing the positive impacts of not allowing children to have access to cell phones while in school, other schools will soon follow. This will soon be a global change and people will be wondering why we have not implemented such bans sooner.

Julia Bickford

Boulder

The Daily Camera welcomes letters to the editor and guest opinions from readers. Read our guidelines, and send submissions to openforum@dailycamera.com.