Letters to the Editor
Save Trees By Monitoring
In response to Tracey MacDermott’s March column, “The Million Tree March,” I would also love to expand and connect the tree canopy of Denver. However, with the increase in the pH of Denver’s water, which took effect last month, I believe that there is a very real possibility that in two decades, Denver could be without trees entirely.
Denver Water’s increase in water pH from 7.8 to 8.8 is part of a vital lead remediation program. However, as seen in the accompanying chart, a pH of 8.8 is beyond the range where trees can live. A water pH of 8.8 does not mean that the soil will have a pH of 8.8. Due to a condition known as soil buffering, water pH does not easily impact soil pH — but it can change soil pH over time. The remediation program is expected to take at least 15 years to complete. The increased pH levels are expected to be in place that entire time.
Other cities have already implemented water pH higher than 8.8 as part of their lead remediation programs, but these are cities that have much more rainfall than Denver. And studies of increased water pH in areas of limited rainfall – with soils that are already on the alkaline side and over an extended time period – do not exist. In short, no one knows exactly what will happen. In response to recent questions, the Extension Office noted that one concern is that sodium will build-up in the soil over time. The increased sodium limits the ability of the trees to take in nutrients, and the tree then dies.
The role of trees in improving air quality, lowering temperatures and raising home values is well known. Trees also directly affect our health. A 2013 study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine showed that a decline in the tree canopy was directly linked to increased deaths due to cardiovascular and lower-respiratory tract illnesses.
So what can you do? Monitor!
First, start now — before your irrigation system is turned on and higher pH water is put on your soil. Go out in your yard and collect a plastic bag or container of soil and label it with the date and where in your yard it was taken. You can send it off to CSU for soil analysis now, or save it to send in with a sample taken two years from now — and then two years later. Be sure to record your results. The goal is to track changes in soil pH over time. It is important to use a higher-end test, like CSU’s, because the off-the-shelf testing kits work do not work as well for alkaline soils. The CSU test is $35, and information can be found at soiltestinglab.colostate.edu. For Park Hill residents, the closest site to pick up the CSU testing kits is City Floral.
The Front Range is already a tough place for trees. If our soil pH increases, we will lose trees. For individual homeowners who must remove their dead trees, it will be a multi-thousand dollar cost, but for the population, it will be a public health disaster. To prevent this, individuals must monitor their soil, and keep Denver Water informed of changes. Doing so would allow Denver Water to adjust course and to head off the crisis that would accompany the loss of the tree canopy.
Most importantly, contact Denver Water at 303-893-2444. Request that they implement a soil and tree monitoring program for the entire time period of the increased in water pH levels. If soil pH rises, the program should then focus on public awareness to enable homeowners to take preventative measures to save their trees.
Susan Wroble, Park Hill
Fate Of The Neighborhood
I lead a congregation of more than 100 people just one block from the Park Hill Golf Course. Our community, with its varied minority voices, has typically been disenfranchised. And now Woody Garnsey is trying to drown out our voices by calling community engagement as part of the planning process for the golf course land an “enormous waste of scarce resources.” (See “This is Outrageous,” from the March issue.)
Mr. Garnsey, who lives in South Park Hill, a much wealthier, less diverse population than Northeast Park Hill, also has proposed a ballot measure that would ask Denverites citywide to vote on whether there should be development on the Park Hill Golf Course. In other words, a small, well-funded group wants the entire city to determine the fate of a specific neighborhood that demands a say in its future.
Northeast Park Hill has many needs – attainable affordable housing, a supermarket, restaurants and retail, a good park with amenities for children, job training and business opportunities, and more.
Many of us have been distrustful of development efforts in the past, but we think a balanced plan for the former golf course could help this neighborhood. We need to have a diverse community conversation to figure out what the right balance can be.
What is outrageous is Mr. Garnsey’s belief that removing this community’s voice is justified.
Imam Abdur-Rahim Ali, Masjid Taqwa,
Northeast Denver Islamic Center
Editor’s note: Click here for more about Save Open Space Denver’s decision to pursue a ballot measure that would require a vote of the people to remove conservation easements from protected lands.
Less Than 1 Percent
The COVID-19 outbreak, disrupting the economy and overwhelming health professionals, is also demonstrating the importance of local and state governments. All over the globe, the response and effectiveness of usually quiet public health and emergency management departments are being scrutinized by the public and the media alike.
Around the water cooler (OK, it’s a kombucha dispenser) at our shared workspace in downtown Denver, I am hearing people asking if those departments at both city and state level have the financial and human resources to adequately handle the COVID-19 outbreak. Usually that question is asked by policy nerds like me, but a public health crisis heightens residents’ awareness of the role of government.
Fortunately, I can direct my co-workers and neighbors to abalancingact.com, to learn more about Colorado’s and Denver’s priorities by directing them to review budget simulations for the State of Colorado and the City and County of Denver. Exploring the State of Colorado’s budget, I learn that less than 1 percent of the General Fund currently goes towards the Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). When delving into Denver’s budget, I discover that the public health department receives an appropriation of $54 million, or about 4 percent of the overall budget.
Some residents may want to learn how much they individually contribute to a specific department like public health. Denver provides a taxpayer receipt that allows individuals to find out how much they are paying for specific services. I was surprised to learn, for example, I am only paying about $35 toward public health services, or about 2 percent of my overall city tax bill. This seems like a small amount to pay for a department that could soon be facing a large number of sick people.
Information from tools like Taxpayer Receipt allows constituents to see where their taxes are going. This information can help them voice their concerns in an informed conversation with state legislators or city councilman about budget priorities. These conversations are important to both citizens and the agencies that serve them, as they develop plans and budgets to deal with everyday problems and crises like COVID-19.
Brenda Morrison, Park Hill
Editor’s note: The author is a partner in Denver-based Engaged Public, a public sector consulting firm that developed Balancing Act. Ms. Morrison originally wrote this update for her company blog, and agreed it could be reproduced here.
We love your letters, and give preference to those that address an issue that has been covered in the newspaper, or a topic that is Park Hill or Denver-specific. Send letters to editor@greaterparkhill.org, and include your full name, and the neighborhood in which you live. Deadlines are the 15th of each month, for the following month’s issue.