Prop DD - Page 5 - Mountain Buzz
 



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #41
 
Grand Junction, Colorado
Paddling Since: 1988
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5
Well said Noah

Creature 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #42
Definite maybe
 
Weld county, Colorado
Paddling Since: 0001
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 577
Sorry everybody. I started this thread cause i couldn't figure out if DD was good or bad for us as boaters. Sorry it turned into Facebook politics.
__________________
"It is fun to have fun but you have to know how"---The Cat In The Hat
NoCo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #43
 
lmyers's Avatar
 
Buena Vista, Colorado
Paddling Since: 2005
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoCo View Post
Sorry everybody. I started this thread cause i couldn't figure out if DD was good or bad for us as boaters. Sorry it turned into Facebook politics.
Not sure what you expected... simple topics constantly get derailed around here and politics is one of the most contentious subjects to discuss. Honestly this has stayed on topic better than I expected.
lmyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #44
 
Steamboat Springs, Colorado
Paddling Since: 2003
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 7
As context, I have worked in water education, river restoration and water management in CO for 15 years. Several people on this thread have accurately described how DD money would be spent. The grant program it would go to is currently split up between all sorts of activities, including recreation development, river restoration, development of new ways to keep water in rivers and water infrastructure for municipalities. Likely to stay that way in the short run, but things can always change. The money currently available funds lots of good work in CO and while I see some things funded that I don't agree with, on the whole it's positive. I voted for DD because of all this. If you have concerns with the funding source, which is perfectly legit, vote no. Hope that helps.
co_biscuit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2 Weeks Ago   #45
 
GeoRon's Avatar
 
Golden, Colorado
Paddling Since: 1974
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 822
Thank you NoCo for bringing the topic up. It was very important to discuss. I had my vote changed by becoming better informed.

Anytime you talk about governing you are talking politics. DD is about governing our shared use of water.

Hopefully we can get smarter about governing our shared use of water and that DD is seed money toward making that happen.
GeoRon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #46
Definite maybe
 
Weld county, Colorado
Paddling Since: 0001
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 577
Save the Poudre is asking for a no vote on DD
__________________
"It is fun to have fun but you have to know how"---The Cat In The Hat
NoCo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #47
 
Golden, Colorado
Paddling Since: 2007
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 124
Some people were asking about AW's opinion on DD. https://www.americanwhitewater.org/c...ticleid/34325/ They strongly endorse it as well.

Personally I voted for it as I don't care about sports betting and the water plan needs more funding. The unwritten understanding about the water plan is that, if we don't spend the estimated $100 million a year between now and 2050, the deficit will be made up by buy and dry (the practice of city water managers buying out farmer's water rights completely and letting their farms go fallow). It isn't like we don't have enough water for the people moving here, it's that we can't have BOTH water for all the people moving here AND irrigated agriculture at the same level without spending $100 million a year.
__________________
Whitewater Workshop Individualized kayaking lessons in the Denver area.
pilom is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #48
 
Dillon, Colorado
Paddling Since: 1985
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 49
The vast majority of projects and priorities in Colorado's Water Plan are paid for by municipal rate payers. Traditionally in CO, growth pays its way by new development paying fees, citizens pay their way by paying their monthly water bills, and large projects are voted on by the public and paid for with bonds or the Army Corps of Engineers helps design, build and pay for them. This is not funding for huge water supply projects. These huge projects are largely a by-gone era, the end of which being the veto of Two Forks.

The $100M per year gap (of which this $29M will make a small dent) is for for projects that rate payers and new development don't pay for. These are projects for small town water systems, for non-profits working on stream rehap for fish, for plans that reduce the risk from fires and floods, rehabilitate streams, or make landscapes resilient to climate change.

Vote Yes on DD. Completely a no-brainer for Coloradoans. The CWCB (who controls the grant-making system) is made up of good people. This is not some deep-state conspiracy. The state legislature made sports betting legal and then referred this to the people to verify that we want the money to be used for to pay for the funding gaps for CO's Water Plan. They did this to protect the money being swept into another use by future legislatures.

So much work has gone into this by people who know and care. Do they know all the answers and where every dollar will go out into the future, no. It's up to the river basins (Basin Roundtables) to submit their projects for funding.
Rapid Resolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #49
 
GeoRon's Avatar
 
Golden, Colorado
Paddling Since: 1974
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 822
Mixed emotions.....

There can be no joy of the public approval and sponsoring of any type of gambling.

Obviously, it is up to our special interest to make sure that this is not a f'ed up situation.

We should be united to make sure that this money is used wisely.
GeoRon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #50
Definite maybe
 
Weld county, Colorado
Paddling Since: 0001
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 577
Still bot sold. If this w is such a well thought out plan like some one posted here then why is the execution of this plan such a secret? I hope im wrong but it still smells funny.
__________________
"It is fun to have fun but you have to know how"---The Cat In The Hat
NoCo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Classified Ads
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.