Response to library board
Dear Editor:
The hubris shown by John Moffitt, as well as Dan Olson and Michael Cobb, regarding the Meeker Regional Library District continues to amaze. These board members seem to believe that they alone understand what the people of Meeker want in their PUBLIC Library, regardless of what the Librarian, other board members, active library patrons, or even State Law may tell them.
Messrs. Moffitt, Olson, and Cobb believe they have a mandate to change the PUBLIC Library into an entity that reflects their personal “world view” based on the results of the 2024 Presidential Election. In that election 80% of the 76% of eligible voters in Rio Blanco County voted for the Republican Candidates. What that statistic shows is that the majority of voters in Rio Blanco County voted for Republican Candidates. What that statistic does not show is the reason(s) the voters voted for those Candidates. The results of that election do not necessarily equate to support for these three board members and their definition of conservatism nor does it reflect the voters’ dissatisfaction with the Meeker PUBLIC Library or its programs. For some reason Mr. Moffitt feels that this election is proof that the members of the Library District feel that Messrs. Olson, Cobb, and Moffitt are qualified to make decisions that undermine the Librarian, library programs, and their fellow board members.
The Meeker PUBLIC Library is a warm and inviting place where patrons find materials for learning and leisure. Materials are available for high school students, who no longer have a library in their school, and for home schoolers. It is an invaluable resource for the community. What the Library does not have are materials labeled as Conservative, Liberal, Christian, or Non-Christian. It does raise the question of how John Moffitt has been able to determine that there are more or less materials available under anv of those topics. It is hard to believe that someone who freely admits to not being able to find “Oliver Twist” in the library is able to determine the subject matter of the materials in the library’s collections. Perhaps the next time Mr. Moffitt writes to the editor. he can provide actual facts on how he has come to the conclusions he so readily shares about his perceived inequities within the Library.
Mr. Moffitt continuously mentions that he is not interested in “banning” books. What he fails to mention is that he feels that as the president of the board he should have the power to review the collection and to decide what materials are purchased. You do not need to actually ban a book if it has never been added to the collection. You have essentially banned the book by exclusion.
I truly hope that the elected officials, whose duty it is to select qualified board members to the library district, consider their responsibility to appoint responsible people who are knowledgeable about the true purpose of a PUBLIC library and are more interested in supporting the library and the community as a whole, rather than promoting their own “world view.”
Other questions Mr. Moffitt might want to address are:
• Why did Messrs. Moffitt. Cobb. and Olson vote to lower the mill levy that the voters of the county approved when it was clear in that ELECTION what the people wanted? As a board they should have been aware of some major upcoming expenses.
• Why has there been a major delay in the repair of the library roof and HVAC system?
• Why, after lowering the mill levy, does Mr. Moffitt continue to find bia ticket items on which to spend money?
• Why, after Mr. Moffitt became president, has the Library started spending thousands of dollars a month for a laywer to sit in on board meetings?
• Why, after Mr. Moffitt’s term as board secretary, are meetings now being recorded?
• Why does there seem to be such a concern about pornography and sexuality in our library by Messrs. Moffitt, Cobb, and Olson? Is this a true issue based on legal definition, an issue based on conspiracy theories, or just an attempt to create a “red herring” issue to agitate the community? Has there been any pornography found in the Library that meets the legal definition of pornography?
• Why does “Gender Queer” continue to be an issue 3 years after the community concerns regarding the book were formally addressed and resolved? Why do some board members continue to spread false rumors and misinformation about that book?
• Why do the three men on the Meeker Regional Library District Board, who are relatively new to our community, continue to try to create outrage and concerns about our library, when there really are not any major problems/concerns being expressed by the community?
Meeker has a wonderful PUBLIC library. Board members should be promoting our Library and building on the positive rather than creating negative and often misleading narratives.
All this crazy divisiveness needs to stop.
Jennifer Key
Meeker
Thank you, Meeker!
Dear Editor:
The 2025 Meeker Mustang Makeover will be remembered as a landmark event, shattering records and capturing the hearts of all who attended. In our seventh year, our County’s two historic fires filled the fairgrounds with over 1,200 firefighters requiring the postponement of the event until the end of September.
Thank you to our sponsors, our volunteers, our trainers and their families, the Meeker Community (#MeekerStrong) turned out to support this home town event!
Under saddle three year old horses sold for nearly an average of $10,000, remarkable prices for 120 day wonder horses who just months ago were ready to jump high fences to get away. Our small town Makeover set a new standard for mustang events across the nation.
The event was elevated by a two day event this year that kicked off with our Mustang Only Horse Show. Trainers came from across the west, and the horse show attracted new attendees who brought their beautiful horses to compete and be part of the action. Many of our youth trainers went home with their horses, and at least $1,000 in scholarship funds as well as prize money and awards thanks to our community sponsors.
This year’s auction was nothing short of extraordinary. Bidding was fierce, and by the end of the night, the auction had not only doubled last year’s total with total receipts of $128,000, but one of the top horses sold for an astounding $22,000. This remarkable achievement underscores the value and potential of these once-wild mustangs, now transformed into exceptional equine partners.
But perhaps the most heartwarming outcome of the night was that every mustang found a loving home. The connection between the horses and their new owners was evident, and the joy on their faces as they led their new companions out of the arena was a beautiful reminder of the life-changing impact of the Meeker Mustang Makeover.
The success of the 2025 Meeker Mustang Makeover is a testament to the courage and fortitude of our community, the dedication of the trainers, the passion of the buyers. Over and over again, visitors remarked on the friendliness of our town and its citizens. How many towns in America can three visitors on mustangs go bar hopping? Meeker opened their arms, and the audience appreciated the warm welcome. So we thank you, our volunteers, our sponsors, and our community.
Every year this event has grown, and this year in particular was a powerful reminder of what can be achieved when a community comes together with a shared purpose.
Special mention to: Meeker Lion’s Club for refreshments, Piceance Mustang Volunteers, and all our volunteers who came out to help welcome and support our trainers.
As the dust settles on the arena, the legacy of this year’s event will continue to inspire and pave the way for future mustangs and their trainers. The Meeker Mustang Makeover has once again proven that with heart, determination, and community support, anything is possible.
Deirdre Macnab, president, Jane Turnburke, vice president, Sabine Murray, Secretary, JH Sheridan, Treasurer, John Rodgers, Steve Mantle (Mustang Advisor), Mike Gotchey (DVM), Elizabeth Pearce, Bettina Bigelow, Kristin Jacob, Tyrell Turner (BLM Liaison)
Library collections
Dear Editor:
I strenuously object to the banning of books in our library by board members. The selection of books is up to the head librarian, not the board. Further, I object to having Christians characterized as believing just like one board member. The assumption that our community thinks and believes as he does is outrageous. Even if they do, each resident is entitled to his or her own view about book selections. Harping on one book one person doesn’t like is a lost cause. What about all the other 99.9% of the collection that seems to be satisfactory to everyone?
Let’s support our public library that is open to everyone and a treasure of our community.
Kaye Sullivan
Meeker
