Affordable housing bond

In the Sunday Gazette, there was an article “Lawsuit seeks to block Colorado Springs affordable housing bond.” The Preserve Pine Creek group of residents have filed an injunction against Colorado Springs City Council and Mayor Yemi Mobolade in opposition to the 232-unit Royal Pines apartment complex at North Powers and North Union boulevards.

The common definition of affordable housing is that the tenants/owners are having to spend more than 30% of their income on housing.

However, the Royal Pines units would be available to residents who make less than 70% of the area median income, which is roughly $70,000/year for an individual.

In February 2024, the previous City Council had ignored the objections of neighbors and approved the Royal Pines apartment project.

However, the out-of-state developer did not start the project within the required timeline.

At a May 13 council meeting, a majority of six recently elected City Council members was now considering issuing a $60 million private activity bond without reviewing the new circumstances. Specifically, the Aven apartments had been built at North Powers and Briargate only a few blocks from the proposed Royal Pines apartment site.

The Aven project will have seven buildings with 221 apartments. The first tenants moved in during June, and the Aven project is expected to be completed in November.

In my presentation to the council, I first requested that the council members simply delay issuing the Royal Pines bond until an in-depth review was completed. My question was why the council should issue that private activity bond for the Royal Pines project when the Aven apartments will have already fulfilled the true affordable housing needs of the surrounding community? There were no questions, comments, or any discussion by the council members of this information on the Aven apartments.

Now, the lawsuit to block the Royal Pines apartments is another reason that the council must reverse the approval of a $60 million private activity bond.

The judge will just tell the council to go back and reconsider the issue. Each council member must have a true affordable housing need in their district where a $60 million bond would be better spent.

Russell L. Elsberry

Colorado Springs

NYC mayoral candidate’s platform

Re: Tom Cronin’s article on Zohran Mamdani, New York City mayoral candidate.

Cronin begins by telling us not to fear those different from us. Fair enough. I agree that we should get to know others and their core beliefs and intents before making a judgment.

Then Cronin sets up a scenario that equates anyone who might have a legitimate concern and associates them with the Klan-types and those who believe in UFOs. He dedicates considerable comment to the examples of those who have indeed been discriminatory.

The only fact mentioned about Mamdani is that he is a pro-Palestinian, anti-ICE candidate.

We are not told that he wants to defund the police and set up very extensive social programs with everything from free child care, to rent freezes and sanctuary designations for a host of causes.

Mamdani’s platform is a script taken from a socialist handbook, which has not worked so well in Cuba, Burma and many other countries.

Since I don’t live in the highly taxed city of New York, perhaps I should not be concerned about what those voters decide. Let them craft their own environment.

My issue is with Cronin’s implication that anyone who might have a legitimate concern about someone who wants to discriminate against the Jewish people, who does not want to uphold the law of the land, and who wants to defund those that have committed their lives to protecting the public and puts them in the same class as the Klan and other deviants. Mr. Cronin, your bias is not so subtle.

Jack Hood

Colorado Springs

Laws we might not agree with

We are reading and hearing that we need to show more compassion and fairness toward illegal aliens — those that are peaceful, longtime residents, hardworking, etc.

The law is not “compassion.” Equal justice means that everyone — all of us — abides by laws codified by our elected representatives. Even laws with which we might not always agree. (I think the stop sign down the street is really stupid, but I still stop.)

The code of immigration law stretches to the nation’s founding, with numerous reforms over the years.

What occurs is that reforms are not fully implemented.

We are promised immigration lawlessness will be corrected if we just grant some amnesty or benefits to some “worthy” group or groups.

A reform under President Reagan, in 1986, did just that. It granted nearly 3 million illegal immigrants amnesty. It was supposed to be accompanied by specific and measured enforcement. That latter part was subsequently neglected and occurred half-heartedly. Just the amnesty part took hold.

We should stay the course. When we don’t, it signals the next wave of illegal immigration.

Breaking laws and lying is a way of life in many cultures. I don’t believe the framers of the Constitution — which makes this nation unique —intended to allow us or anyone, including foreigners, to run roughshod over our laws.

Janice Taylor

Colorado Springs