Montrose passes first reading of e-bike restrictions
Montrose City Council unanimously passed an ordinance establishing a 15-mph speed limit for all e-bike riders on sidewalks, trails, and pedestrian multi-use paths within Montrose's 38 municipal parks, and prohibiting off-trail riding. The ordinance also creates a new definition of 'classless electric-assisted vehicles' — those with motors exceeding 750 watts or top speeds above 28 mph — and broadly prohibits their operation on city streets and paths. Violations are Class A traffic infractions with fines of $15 to $100. The ordinance specifically addresses a gap in state law that has left high-powered e-bikes and similar devices in a legal gray zone. Police Chief Blaine Hall announced a public education campaign already underway including e-bike safety training in school P.E. classes in September. Public comment was extensive and supportive, with multiple residents describing near-miss incidents with fast-moving e-bikes on Montrose trails and roads. Questions were raised about nighttime visibility, pushing riders off paths onto streets, and whether fines are sufficient deterrent. A second reading will be required before the ordinance takes effect.
Colorado journalist investigates landlord profiting from immigration detention center
The federal government recently awarded a $529 million contract to the private prison company GEO Group to operate a new immigration detention center in Hudson, Colorado.
But GEO Group is only one piece of the picture.
While the company will operate the facility, another company actually owns the building and stands to profit from the lease.
For Rocky Mountain Community Radio, KGNU’s Abby O’Brien spoke with reporter Logan Davis who has written about this in the Colorado Times Recorder.
His investigation shows that the landlord has ties not only to the detention center, but also to residential properties in the Denver area.
Is our fear of wildfires making them worse?
This summer's vast wildfires have left many Coloradans wary. And that fear shows up not just in how we react to wildfires—but in the words we use to describe them.
Kevin Sweeney, a Public Information Officer working on the Gold Mountain Fire, told us, “When we speak about fire, we use negative language. We use scar, we use scorched, we use words that have high emotional value typically negatively.”
While showing KVNF around the edge of the fire, he stops us before we get too close to a blackened tree. He points out a flag that says “killer tree,” indicating that it could easily fall. In these situations, harsh language can be useful. A negative term, like “burn scar,” helps people understand that the area is dangerous.
But outside those immediate safety warnings, Sweeney says that same language can shape how people think about every kind of fire, including the prescribed burns that help reduce future wildfire risk. “One of the hurdles we have to get over with getting more prescribed fire, more beneficial fire on the landscape is reducing the fear of fire in our communities,” he told us.
Sweeney feels a special connection to this land, as he once lived on the Western Slope and got married in Ouray. He says, “We need more fire in the West, and that's a really hard thing to say when you're driving through a 40,000-acre fire that almost burned down a town, a town that I got married in.”
Instinct tells us that fires need to be put out–immediately. But when it comes to wildfires, the answer isn’t that simple. Sweeney says that when European settlers came to North America, they had really only experienced fires that burned entire towns down. The Ute people and other native groups “would come up into these lands and hunt and then migrate down into lower valleys, but they would light fires behind them when they left so that they could have good hunting grounds.” Sweeney says the current mindset of “put every fire out” has resulted in disasters like the Gold Mountain Fire.
Sweeney recognizes that changing the way people think, or speak, about fire isn't easy, especially after a summer like this. He says it’s important to be sensitive about the tremendous impact they can have, but also says, “I come from a place of knowing that the only way we're going to fix this is by having more fire.”
For Sweeney, changing how we manage fire starts with changing how we talk about it. Because if every fire is seen only as destruction, he says it becomes much harder to use carefully planned fires that can help prevent the next disaster.
