<em>Dear Editor:
</em>Douglas Bruce is purposely misleading your readers with his July 18 letter to the editor “Enterprise reform petitions will benefit residents.” His letter was full of inaccuracies and deception.
In talking about a city budget of $360 million, he neglects to mention that number includes $122.5 million in funds not available for general fund spending.

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>RE: Page 20 — July 18, 2008, edition
It’s interesting that the referenced page has two articles with which I disagree.
First, “Letter to the Editor” from State Rep. Douglas Bruce.
Law in the State of Colorado requires anyone who changes the normal flow of water and causes damage to someone downstream to be held liable for that damage.

<em>Dear Editor,</em>
Your CSBJ editorial would have been more effectual had it been more factual. It’s a shame your defense of Big Government and illegal city taxes was published on Independence Day, which was sparked by a tax revolt against much lower colonial levies.
First, there are no “cuts” in the 10-year phase-out of the secret “substitute tax” the city now collects on utility bills.

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>RE: “Bruce Proposal would likely cause irreparable damage”
I have seen some wild stories and articles around stating that the sky would fall if Doug Bruce would succeed. This article is an out and out stretch of the truth.
Let’s look at what got us into this fix in the first place.

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>Thank you for the June 27 article on electronic or digital billboards or “Powerpoint on a Pole.” Your article serves as a useful “wake-up call” to alert the public about an outdoor advertising technology that is sure to affect many people, and affect them negatively based on experience locally and around the country.

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>RE: “Why not ‘shift’ the focus to increasing the Lodgers and Automobile Rental Tax?”<br>
The meeting and tourism industry has become a popular target for those hoping to raise funds to make up for budget shortfalls. It’s easy to think that it would be harmless to increase taxes and fees paid by visitors to our city and state.

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>Please allow me to make clear a few points about the Colorado Division of Insurance.
The Division of Insurance is designed to help consumers understand insurance issues and get relief when they have been harmed by an insurance company. We work to help consumers make informed choices and avoid problems when they can. We also communicate with insurance companies on behalf of consumers to determine unfair treatment and to take steps to remedy those situations.

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>The Pueblo Chieftain editorial board would like to clarify its position regarding the ongoing review of the proposed Southern Delivery System.
The comments come in response to a recent column and editorial in the Colorado Springs Business Journal calling for a negotiated settlement of the SDS proposal.

Dear Editor: It seems like everyone, with exception, is on Doug Bruce’s back. No one really ever seems to speak up for him. I will. This man who authored the Taxpayer Bill of Rights has saved the taxpayers of Colorado not only millions or tens of millions, but hundreds of millions of dollars. Every taxpayer, [...]

<em>Dear Editor:
</em>I am writing in response to comments made in the “Financial planning trends toward fee-only services” article in the April 25 issue.
I am constantly amazed (and saddened) by the capacity of some individuals in my industry (financial services) to obscure and cloud issues.