Friday, December 5, 2003

Colorado Water There's a bad moon rising over a recent settlement agreement for water use from the Gunnison River, according to the Rocky Mountain News [December 5, 2033, "Critics fight canyon water settlement"]. From the article, "In April, the Bureau of Reclamation, the state of Colorado and the National Park Service agreed to a minimum flow for the river through the Black Canyon. Following a legal challenge, the Colorado Supreme Court set a Dec. 26 deadline for briefs from attorneys representing groups who want the water settlement killed. 'Front Range water interests have their eyes on the Gunnison River,' said Drew Peternell, an attorney for Trout Unlimited, one of the groups filing briefs. More water flows through the river than is covered by the settlement, leaving excess water that could be tapped for diversion to water- short Front Range communities south of Denver, critics say." 6:43:32 PM

Denver November 2004 Election I may have been wrong in stating that state congressional boundaries for the November 2004 election will be the same as those in 2002. State GOP leaders filed a lawsuit yesterday in Federal court asking the court to block the Colorado Supreme Court decision, according to the Denver Post [December 5, 2003, "GOP asks federal court to block redistrict ruling"]. From the article, "Attorney Richard Westfall said Monday's Supreme Court decision was wrong, and he wants the federal court to determine if it violates the U.S. Constitution. Westfall said he will ask for "expeditious treatment" in light of upcoming elections. Republican legislative leaders said they hope for a decision by the end of February so precinct caucuses can proceed in April. It takes 30 days to prepare for the caucuses." More details on the redistricting battle from the Rocky Mountain News [December 5, 2003, "Democrats: Mapmaker, mapmaker, call it a wrap"]. From the article, "Attorney Richard Westfall, who represents Gov. Bill Owens and the legislature in the federal court case, said he wants the three-judge federal panel to hear the case and to act quickly. Attorney Richard Kaufman, who represents the secretary of state, agreed there's "still a live issue" to be decided. He also asked the federal court to hear the case - not to dismiss it, as the Democrats want." Reggie Rivers weighs in on the redistricting case in his column in today's Denver Post [December 5, 2003, "Taking sides and that's all"]. He thinks a good move would be to remove the legislature from having the say in redistricting. According to Rivers, "Between now and the next census, I think we should change the way we handle redistricting in the state. It might be interesting to add a constitutional amendment that would take redistricting power away from the legislature and give it to a jury. Twelve regular citizens could sit and hear the evidence presented by the Republican and Democratic parties (supervised by a judge), and the jury would have the power to accept one of the maps presented by the parties or create one of its own using the information provided. I believe regular citizens would have a better chance of getting this right than our obviously self-interested legislators." Are we a Republic or Democracy? 6:09:36 AM

© Copyright 2009 John Orr. Last update: 3/14/09; 6:36:07 PM.