Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Fall ballot issues Denver Business Journal: "The United Food & Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 7 said Wednesday it is removing two of its four potential ballot questions, including one that would increase commercial property tax by 5 percent and another that would require employers to provide annual cost-of-living increases. The measures were filed in response to Amendment 47, a so-called right-to-work ballot initiative that would bar unions from collecting mandatory dues in workplaces that engage in collective bargaining. UFCW President Ernest Duran said he agreed to remove the two counter measures after the Public Affairs Committee of the Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce voted to oppose the union-supported measures as well as Amendment 47." "denver 2008" 6:06:25 PM

? for President? Political Wire: "A new Quinnipiac poll in New York finds that Sen. Barack Obama crushes Sen. John McCain, 50% to 36%. It's no real surprise, but the finding that Obama has now pulled even with McCain among white voters is a positive sign for his campaign." Josh Marshall: "As I and innumerable others have mentioned, the red states that seem genuinely ripe for flipping this year are Colorado and Virginia. Others are definitely possible. But those are the ones that might even be considered probable. The most recent poll of Viriginia (May 22nd) has Obama beating McCain by 7 points (49%-42%). And the one immediately previous has Obama down by 3 points (47%-44%). Colorado is even stronger for Obama. The most recent poll (Rasmussen, May 21st) has Obama up by 6 points and the one previous to that (Ramussen, April 21st) had him up by 3." Political Wire: "A new Gallup Poll shows women moving to Sen. Barack Obama now that Sen. Hillary Clinton is out of the Democratic presidential race. Key finding: In general election match ups with Sen. John McCain, Obama's lead among women has now expanded from five percentage points to 13, while his deficit among men has shrunk from six points to two." Political Wire: "Sen. Barack Obama begins the general election campaign against Sen. John McCain with a 47% to 41% lead in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, "but not so great an edge as might be expected given the gale-force political headwinds against" Republicans." "2008 pres" 5:58:52 PM

Race and politics Gallup "A large majority of blacks, 78%, and an even larger majority of whites, 88%, say the fact that Barack Obama is black makes no difference in terms of their likelihood of voting for him for president...Without question, blacks are going to vote for Obama in overwhelming numbers; the latest Gallup tracking shows that Obama gets 93% of the black vote when pitted against Republican John McCain in a hypothetical trial heat...So on the one hand, black voters say Obama's race makes no difference to them, and on the other hand, about 9 out of 10 blacks say they will vote for Obama. But the high percentage of the black vote going to Obama is not unusual. Gallup polling estimated that John Kerry received 93% of the black vote in 2004, and Al Gore received 95% in 2000. So it may be that black voters are making the (correct) self-observation that they would be voting for the Democratic candidate regardless of his or her race, meaning that Obama's particular race is not a deciding factor for them." Thanks to the Daily Kos for the link. "2008 pres" 5:57:15 PM

Economic policy Ed Cone: "'Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama would both cut taxes for the majority of Americans, with Sen. McCain, the Republican contender, awarding the biggest cut to the richest Americans and Sen. Obama, the Democrat, favoring those at the bottom of the income scale, according to an analysis of the candidates' plans released Wednesday.' That's how the Wall Street Journal reads a report by the Tax Policy Center." "2008 pres" 5:55:26 PM

Runoff From The Mountain Mail: "The Buena Vista Public Works Department personnel continue to monitor Cottonwood Creek runoff, director Roy Gertson said June 3. Normal runoff during peak flow is 300-350 cubic feet per second, Gertson said. "Last night it peaked at 246 cfs ... we think we are going to go way over that," he said. The creek was still in its channel June 3, but Gertson said he has no idea how high water will get. Cooler weather last week may have slowed melting of the snowpack. Flow Friday night dipped below 80 cfs and early Sunday peaked at 140 cfs. By 7 p.m. it fell to 95 cfs after a cooler day in the valley." Here's a report about the Dolores River runoff from The Cortez Journal. They write: "McPhee Reservoir filled at 11 a.m. Monday, and that could be good news for another week for rafters and boaters enjoying the releases below the dam. "The reservoir is full, and what comes in upstream, we'll take the first 800 cubic feet per second for the irrigators, and the rest will go downstream," said Ken Curtis, engineer with the Dolores Water Conservancy District. "Right now, it looks like the flows will stay fairly high for the next week or so." Flows of at least 800 cfs have been defined as raftable on the Dolores River below McPhee, but kayaks and canoes can get by with 200 cfs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management Web site. "What we see coming in looks like it could be 1,600 cfs for the next week, but it can vary hour by hour," Curtis said. "I recommend getting on the water right away because it will be going down." "colorado water" 5:49:58 PM

Energy policy: Nuclear According to The Cañon City Daily Record the Fremont County Commissioners have approved Black Range Minerals' plans to drill test holes for a uranium operation in the Tallahassee area. From the article: Exploration drilling for uranium in the Tallahassee area received the green light from the county this morning, but the issue is far from settled. Following months of controversy and argument, the Fremont County Commissioners unanimously approved the Conditional Use Permit required to test the area northwest of Cañon City for the economic viability of a full uranium mining and milling operation. However, the commissioners warned Black Range Minerals the county will be a strict watchdog to ensure the company complies with a lengthy list of conditions. Those stipulations are in the works and are scheduled for adoption next month following a public comment period. "The decision we have before us today is complicated by the fact so many people" made impassioned pleas, both for and against the project during an earlier public hearing, said District 3 Commissioner Ed Norden. Norden and the other commissioners, Larry Lasha and Mike Stiehl, admitted the issue has caused many sleepless nights. They also said they had changed their minds "several times" throughout the entire permitting process... The permit allows BRM only to drill to determine the economic viability of a new mine in an area with a long history of uranium mining. The exploration drilling phase could last between three to five years, and if it proves feasible, the company will then consider a full mining and milling operation. If undertaken, such an enterprise will be subject to the lengthy, arduous process of filing for literally dozens of permits from the state and the county. BRM is on record saying they would consider underground mining and not "in situ recovery," where leaching solution is pumped into the mineral deposit via a borehole, circulated to dissolve the ore, and then extracted and processed. If each step is successful, BRM has pledged to invest time, money and effort to create the most technologically-advanced, state-of-the-art facilities possible, including its own mill to process the uranium. However, in a county that still has a Superfund cleanup at the Cotter Corp site on its mind, Black Range's assurances rang untrue to some residents. To many, the exploration means the certain return of uranium mining to the county and a new host of issues. The commissioners' decision came following months of heated debate over the possibility of uranium activity returning to Fremont County. Many residents of the Tallahassee area vehemently oppose the exploration. Locals swarmed to sign petitions against the project and joined Tallahassee Area Committee, Inc., an organization formed explicitly to fight uranium exploration. Following today's decision, TAC issued a press statement threatening legal and legislative actions and said the approval is not the end of the issues but rather the beginning. "The appropriateness of differing land uses in the Tallahassee Area Watershed must be resolved," president Jim Hawklee wrote in the statement. "The broader issue of uranium mining must be addressed in its totality."[...] Colorado Citizens Against Toxicwaste, an organization that has fought against Cotter Corp. for years, recently adopted a resolution that unsuccessfully urged the commissioners to deny the permit and, instead, bring in an outside expert. Acknowledging vehement opposition and impassioned support throughout the county, TAC recognized the project has fractured relationships in the community... The commissioners have prepared a draft document of conditions that will be attached to the Conditional Use Permit. That record will be available in the Planning and Zoning Department, 615 Macon Ave., this Wednesday. The document also will be available online at www.fremontco.com the same day. Public comment must be in writing and is due to the county by close of business on June 25. Final conditions should be adopted at the regularly scheduled meeting to begin at 9:30 a.m. July 8 at 615 Macon Ave. More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain. More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here. "2008 pres" 5:48:22 PM

2008 Democratic National Convention From The Rocky Mountain News: "A football field-size area now used for Pepsi Center VIP parking will be turned over to protesters at this summer's Democratic National Convention, an attorney for protest groups said Monday. The 50,000-square-foot section of Lot A will be surrounded by a "transparent and sound-transparent fence" and converted into a public demonstration area, said Steven Zansberg, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Proximity to the Pepsi Center has been a hot issue for protest groups leery about a possible repeat of what happened at the 2004 Democratic convention in Boston, where cagelike areas made of concrete barricades, netting and razor wire were established for protesters. Denver officials have said since last summer that protesters will get closer to the Pepsi Center since it is not next to a freeway and railroad tracks as was the Boston site four years ago. The protest area will be just southwest of the Pepsi Center's main entrance, Zansberg said." "2008 pres" 5:46:53 PM

? for U.S. Senate? From The Rocky Mountain News: "Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mark Udall, accused of "blowing off" debates with Republican challenger Bob Schaffer, on Tuesday proposed holding at least eight debates statewide between July and November. The proposal came several hours after Schaffer's campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, asked why Udall's campaign was dragging its feet on scheduling debates...The Udall campaign on Tuesday afternoon did confirm two debates, one in July with the Southeast Business Partnership and one in August sponsored by Channel 12. West said the debates have to be scheduled around Udall's congressional duties." "denver 2008" 5:46:04 PM

EPA issues new rule on diversions The EPA has issued a new rule saying that diversions do not have to obtain discharge permits, according to The Denver Post. From the article: The movement of billions of gallons of water around the country for drinking, irrigation and other uses will not require permits under the Clean Water Act, even though the water could contain contaminants, the Bush administration announced Monday. The new rule will allow water to be diverted from one body to another without a discharge permit, which is typically required when pollutants are released directly into streams, rivers and other surface waters. Instead, Environmental Protection Agency officials said, the agency will focus on preventing contaminants from entering water sources in the first place. In addition, safe drinking water laws ensure water is clean before it flows into households, and other parts of the Clean Water Act[~]such as water quality standards[~]will still protect supplies. "Clean water permits should focus on water pollution, not water movement," Benjamin H. Grumbles, the EPA's assistant administrator for water, said in a statement. He later noted that the decision reaffirmed the agency's 30-year view of the Clean Water Act. Thousands of water transfers occur across the country each year. They provide water for city dwellers, irrigation projects, dams and ecological restoration. The EPA has never routinely required them to be permitted under the Clean Water Act. Municipal water districts that rely on water transfers applauded the decision. "The problem isn't the transfer, it's the introduction of the pollutant in the first place," said Chips Barry, the general manager of the Denver Water Department. Denver receives 45 percent to 55 percent of its drinking water through two tunnels that bore through the Rocky Mountains, releasing the water into the South Platte River before it is piped to the city. "In some cases, the imported water is cleaner than the water in stream in the first place." "colorado water" 5:44:51 PM

Pioneer/Laird litigation: Agreement Below is a press release from the Colorado Division of Water Resources about the settlement reached last week between the groundwater users and surface water right users on the North Fork of the Republican River (Pioneer/Laird litigation). State Engineer Dick Wolfe announced yesterday that an agreement was reached between ground water users in the Northern High Plains Designated Ground Water Basin and numerous senior surface water right users on the North Fork of the Republican River. The dispute was set for a three week trial before the Colorado Ground Water Commission's Hearing Officer, Joseph (Jody) Grantham. On Friday, June 6, Mr. Grantham signed an order vacating the proceedings pending completion of all necessary terms of the settlement. Non-compliance with the terms will result in the hearing being held in January/February of 2009. Mr. Wolfe indicates the parameters of the settlement are broad and incorporate most of the surface water right users on the North Fork. Some of those water users were not part of the case, however, in this manner a long-term solution to the ongoing dispute between surface and ground water users in the area can better be served. The case was initiated in 2005 when the Pioneer and Laird ditch owners filed suit with the Ground Water Commission, requesting ground water wells in the basin be shut down in order to provide water to what they deem to be "senior" surface water rights. The surface water right owners feel their rights are being injured by the junior wells and therefore, the wells should be administered based on the "first in time, first in right" priority system, rather than a modified system as allowed for under the designation of the Northern High Plains ground water basin. Wolfe said: "I am very pleased with all of the hard work of the parties in the case, as well as the willingness of the Republican River Water Conservation District and Yuma County Water Authority to step up and help. Without their support and creative thinking, we certainly were heading down a litigation path." In general, the terms of the agreement call for a lease/buyout of the surface water rights for $20 million including a lease in 2008 of these water rights for $500,000. Funding is contingent on financing of approximately $5 million by the District for a 20-year lease and approval of up to $15 million bond issue by the voters this November. Yuma County Water Authority will be seeking approval of the bond. Wolfe also indicated "I understand it is a lot of money, however, the upside is that it will greatly assist the State in complying with the Republican River Compact by allowing that surface water to flow across the state line. This will lessen our debt to Kansas on a yearly basis and allow the farms and cities in this area to obtain the water they need to thrive." More Coyote Gulch coverage here, here, here, here and here. "colorado water" 12:09:03 PM

EPA fines Colorado Springs firm $300,000 for stormwater violations From The Colorado Springs Gazette: "A Colorado Springs construction firm has been fined $300,000 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for stormwater violations at 16 big-box store construction sites in four states. Colorado Structures Inc. had runoff management and permit inadequacies at construction sites for 13 Wal-Mart and Home Depot stores in Colorado, including one in Colorado Springs, and one each in Nevada, South Dakota and California, according to court documents. In a settlement with the EPA and the Justice Department, Colorado Structures agreed to reduce stormwater pollution at its sites, comply with permit requirements, inspect sites regularly and report the findings to the EPA, and provide stormwater training for employees, in addition to paying the fine." "colorado water" 6:35:15 AM

Jefferson Lake closed to motorboats From The Denver Post: "Finding a place to drop the props, throttle up the outboard and rip across the water is getting hard in Colorado, as Jefferson Lake joins the list of lakes restricting or banning motorboats to fight zebra mussels. Officials can't say how long the battle against the invasive species will last...Jefferson Lake, like many others across the state that have imposed restrictions, is still open to campers and other outdoor recreation, including row boats or those with electric trolling motors with 55 pounds of thrust or less. The high-altitude reservoir in Park County is near Ken osha Pass and supplies the city of Aurora. Aurora Water has also put restrictions on its Aurora and Quincy reservoirs, requiring all watercraft operators to answer questions and have their equipment inspected before they use designated launches." More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 6:31:32 AM

Grand Lake water quality Here's an update on the declining clarity in Grand Lake, from The Sky-Hi Daily News. From the article: The Colorado Water Quality Control Commission deferred setting a numerical clarity standard for Grand Lake until January 2014, choosing instead to grant a "narrative standard" for the interim. A depth of 13.12 feet, or 4 meters, of water clarity from July through September, a standard sought by West Slope water advocates, would have been the first lake clarity standard in the state of Colorado. Even though Colorado's water quality commission rejected the 4 meter standard at an Upper Colorado River District hearing Monday in Grand Junction, Lane Wyatt of the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments called the commission's decision "groundbreaking." "Grand Lake got a foot in door,[per thou] he said. "One that will result in changes." Rather than a set a value, the commission chose to use language to define a "goal" for the lake. It entails seeking "the highest level of clarity in Grand Lake that's attainable, consistent with the exercise of established water rights and the protection of the aquatic life use." With that action, according to Water Quality Control Commission administrator Paul Frohardt, "the hope is stakeholders work together to try and determine the causes of the limitations on clarity that are occurring now, as well as exploring options for actions taken to improve clarity." And over time, as those efforts evolve, he said, the narrative standard can be redefined as a numerical standard. Until that is achieved, however, Wyatt's and others' concern is the new standard's inexactness... Water Quality commissioners arrived at their decision Tuesday upon hearing testimony from stakeholders, namely the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Grand County, The Northwest Colorado Council of Governments and Grand Lake lakeshore residents. "It's the first time a clarity standard that's based specifically on a goal of clarity has been set for any body of water in Colorado, based on the unique Grand Lake quality as a resource," Frohardt said. Yet in spite of its precedence, some feel the standard came up short for the lake itself. "It is certainly not the outcome that we desired," said Grand Lake shoreline homeowner John Stahl, a retired engineer who helped initiate attempts to establish a clarity standard for Colorado's largest natural lake. Grand County and lakeshore groups were prompted to seek the standard because of increased algae levels in the lake, which reduce lake transparency. Armed with data on the correlation between pumping practices of the Colorado Big-Thompson Project managed by Northern and reduced water clarity in the lake, lake advocates have been seeking the standard for a year. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Colorado Division of Wildlife supported the 4-meter proposal. Northern opposed it. Monday's presentation of data, analyses, testimony and rebuttal upon rebuttal was the final hearing on the matter this go-'round. "It does put more of a burden on the staff at the Colorado Department of Health and Environment to develop this narrative standard, and defers any decision about numeric standards for a long while," Stahl said. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 6:26:34 AM

Southern Delivery System: Comment period comes to a close Friday The SDS comment period is coming to a close, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article: As Friday's deadline approaches, more than 200 individuals or organizations have commented on a draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Southern Delivery System. "We count each concern brought up in the comments, and when you total them there are more than 1,000 comments," said Kara Lamb, public affairs officer for the Bureau of Reclamation, which released the draft EIS on Feb. 29. Reclamation intends to group all of the comments and respond to them in the final EIS... Originally, Reclamation planned to allow two months from the issue of the draft EIS for comments, but at the request of Reps. John Salazar and Mark Udall, both Colorado Democrats, and 15 labor and environmental groups, the deadline was extended by six weeks. At a May 29 meeting in Pueblo, Reclamation was asked by some of the same labor and environmental groups to restart the EIS process because significant alternatives appeared to be left out. Salazar, who had called for the meeting, agreed. Mike Collins, area manager for Reclamation, gave what has become a stock answer by Reclamation staff for all comments received during the period. "We have listened to your comments and they will be addressed in the final EIS," Collins told those at the May meeting. Lamb has said throughout the process that Reclamation would not debate its draft EIS, and that is reflected in the way comments were collected. Comments have come through forms at the open houses, subsequent letters or e-mail and through oral statements made to a court reporter, who was on hand at all the meetings. While the project's sponsors - Colorado Springs, Fountain, Security and Pueblo West - have talked freely about the pros and cons of the seven alternatives in the report, Reclamation has not engaged in the fray. "If new scientific evidence is presented that wasn't available before, or a new data set is presented, it could change," Lamb said early on. "That's why we have the public comment period." Lamb could not say this week whether the nature or volume of the comments would change the final report or the date when it is expected - sometime before the end of the year. SDS has already taken years longer than expected because of the environmental review process. If a record of decision is issued, expected sometime early next year under the current timetable, negotiations for contracts for storage, exchange and conveyance at Lake Pueblo would begin... In the draft EIS, Reclamation selected the proposed action from Pueblo Dam as its preferred alternative, because it is the least costly for the applicants and would use the least energy. Lamb said that could change in the final draft EIS, depending on the nature of comments received. Elements from any of the alternatives might be incorporated in the final choice by Reclamation. Even then, it's up to Colorado Springs and its partners to choose how the project will be built. Project Director John Fredell has said Colorado Springs is shooting for 2012 completion of the pipeline portion of the project. Reservoirs would be built at a later date. One of the Fremont County options represents a "no-action" alternative, which just means Reclamation contracts would not be involved. During the draft EIS comment period, Colorado Springs signed an agreement with Fremont County, providing $50,000 for further technical studies if needed, with Fremont County providing timely permits for the project. Colorado Springs is looking at Fremont County because of a contentious process with Pueblo County under the county's land-use rules for projects of statewide interest under the 1974 HB1041. Fremont County has no 1041 regulations. Colorado Springs has appealed a district court decision saying SDS is subject to Pueblo County's 1041 rules, but is also in pre-1041 consultation with Pueblo County planning staff. According to historic documents, the Bureau of Reclamation looked at a river intake in Fremont County first as a location for the Fountain Valley Conduit, which now serves Colorado Springs, Fountain, Widefield, Security and Stratmoor Hills, before the corridor from Pueblo Dam was chosen when that pipeline was built in the early 1980s. Some of the major issues brought up so far include: - The downstream of confluence option appears to offer a lower cost per acre-foot of firm yield than any other option, but was rejected by Colorado Springs because it would add $700 million to the projected $1 billion cost. Environmental groups and downstream communities say it would also require Colorado Springs to deal more directly with water quality and flooding issues. - Private developers Aaron Million, who is proposing a pipeline from Flaming Gorge Reservoir in Wyoming to the Front Range, and Mark Morley, who is working on a project to bring water north to El Paso County from a reservoir complex near Pueblo Chemical Depot, say their projects could be incorporated with Colorado Springs plans, but were left out of the study. - Upstream water users and environmental groups want more assurance that key flow levels would be maintained in reaches of the river above Lake Pueblo. Some have questioned whether evaluating annual flow averages is sufficient, or whether specific flows at certain times of year should be addressed more prominently. - Paleontologists say not enough attention was given to dinosaur fossils at the proposed Jimmy Camp Creek reservoir site, while neighbors downstream of the location worry about the possibility of flooding and changes in the flood plain downstream of the proposed dam. More Coyote Gulch coverage here. "colorado water" 6:14:35 AM

© Copyright 2009 John Orr. Last update: 3/14/09; 10:21:34 PM.