I’m writing to express my reservations about the enforcement of Breckenridge’s Dark Sky Project. While I appreciate the intent, I worry it places an undue burden on residents and overlooks some serious unintended consequences. 

A recent noncompliance letter warning of “enforcement actions” if I “fail to comply by July 1, 2025” makes our once-friendly town feel more like an HOA that has overdosed on steroids. These kinds of mandates feel like government overreach, sparking pushback from citizens and widening divides we have recently seen across our town, county and country.

The cost of replacing outdoor lights — ones already approved under past town rules — feels hard to justify. It’s a significant expense for homeowners, and I wonder if this top-down approach could better reflect what our community truly needs rather than adding to our financial pressures.

I’ve also noticed inconsistencies that give me pause. Different standards apply to different areas. The streetlights on many of our town streets, including mine, don’t meet the new standards and the nearby ice arena’s lighting seems just as intense. It’s hard not to feel this is a case of “do as I say, not as I do,” which makes compliance even tougher to embrace.

Safety is another concern. My current lights brighten a walkway and steps up to my front porch, keeping them safe at night. Dimming them feels risky, and I’m not sure trading human safety for broader environmental goals makes sense — especially when the rules feel more symbolic than practical.

Finally, I’m troubled by the waste this could create. Replacing working fixtures means tossing them into landfills, which seems at odds with sustainability. I care about dark skies, but I hope the town might reconsider mandatory retrofits and focus on solutions that balance costs, safety, and the environment without straining residents.