Mountain Buzz banner

1 - 20 of 50 Posts

·
Definite maybe
Joined
·
754 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I keep seeing this saying it would protect Colorado's water but it doesnt say how. Any insight on this cause it appears to me to say more dams and water retention projects. Its only 29 million a year but that could easily be used for a bond payment for projects. Sounds bogus to me but then what do i know. Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
As you suggest, "what is DD really about?". Who sponsored this? Who decides what to do with the $$$$$$. Farmers? Developers? Republicans? I don't trust any of these groups to do what is right for water conservation, rivers, wildlife or Coloradans in general. Sorry farmers and developers, I know what you want. Republicans....., well, never mind.

I'd prefer to know very specifically what I'm voting for even though I am a very strong advocate of sin taxes to cover the costs to society for societal harms and voluntary taxes to satisfy some ones stupidity to pay for societal betterment and punishment taxes to just generally say you are an idiot(such as gambling in general).

Any insights on DD would be appreciated. Otherwise, I say vote NO to undefined "water projects". So far it seems to be worded for suckers to vote yes. On this I'm willing to change my mind with enlightenment about the objective of DD.
 

·
Definite maybe
Joined
·
754 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
More I look into this, there is a water plan thats goals sound good for the Colorado river but it does not specify any real plan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,674 Posts
I did a little reading up on it and its certainly pretty vague but what is clear is that the funds, after paying for some gambling habits counselling and administering the division of sports betting, the rest goes to the Water Plan Implementation Cash Fund which is administered by the Colorado Water Conservancy Board.

This article does a pretty good job of explaining where the money will go and what it could be used for...

https://www.aspenjournalism.org/201...colorados-water-plan-but-what-does-that-mean/

Seems like a large emphasis is on managing the water and maintaining the flow out of Colorado into Lake Powell and beyond. This could mean water conservation efforts, paying water rights holder to give up their share and leave it in the river and a lot of other things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
Who decides what to do with the $$$$$$. Farmers? Developers? Republicans? I don't trust any of these groups to do what is right for water conservation, rivers, wildlife or Coloradans in general. Sorry farmers and developers, I know what you want. Republicans....., well, never mind.

Blind rage and derangement syndrome?


You should probably bother to do the smallest amount of research before you vomit up anymore diarrhea of the keyboard.


Perhaps remove the beam in your own eye before you disparage others.



"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Blind rage and derangement syndrome?


You should probably bother to do the smallest amount of research before you vomit up anymore diarrhea of the keyboard.


Perhaps remove the beam in your own eye before you disparage others.



"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."
Don't be so coy, tell us how you really feel!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
Thank you EM for the 'enlightening' article. Considering the sponsors, most supporters and stated purposes this article defines; this "smallest amount of research" as noahfecks suggested leads me to support DD. But what a back ass-ward way to fund a good cause. The stated purposes are so important that they should be completely funded($100m) directly perhaps by water use taxes or property taxes. Better this tax raising $16m from gambling half-wits then no funds at all; a sin/voluntary/punishment tax to pay for hopefully a good cause.

I'm concerned that some future administration might direct the money into 'nefarious' activity such as what the current EPA and Interior departments are doing with regard to subverting their better purposes resulting in the corruption of these organizations. As long as Colorado stays purple to blue then we can perhaps count on these $$$$$'s being used for a good cause and not used for sucking rivers dry.
 

·
Summit Paddler
Joined
·
29 Posts
Proposition DD provides a funding mechanism for the Colorado Water Plan. This is a very comprehensive document that is the result of 10 years of negotiation/collaboration between 9 different river basins. Among other things, it provides funding for river restoration, protecting flows for recreational use, and meeting Colorado’s legal obligations to provide water in the Colorado River for downstream states.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
As long as Colorado stays purple to blue then we can perhaps count on these $$$$$'s being used for a good cause and not used for sucking rivers dry.

Tribalism = a complete lack of objectivity. If you think that both sides don't steal from the peoples coffers to line their pockets you are a fool. Plenty of examples out there of D's shifting funds to fleece the people or fund pet projects.


You know what would actually prevent these funds from being misappropriated in the future? People abandoning the my side/your side mentality and taking an objective look at politicians and policies regardless of the letter that follows. Doing some research before you form an opinion, and not spreading unverified crap every chance you get.


I will remain against this bill because there are too many Ron's out there for this plan to work. The funds will never go to support the work they tell us it will. Hey by the way, where is all the pot money?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
Tribalism = a complete lack of objectivity. If you think that both sides don't steal from the peoples coffers to line their pockets you are a fool. Plenty of examples out there of D's shifting funds to fleece the people or fund pet projects.


You know what would actually prevent these funds from being misappropriated in the future? People abandoning the my side/your side mentality and taking an objective look at politicians and policies regardless of the letter that follows. Doing some research before you form an opinion, and not spreading unverified crap every chance you get.


I will remain against this bill because there are too many Ron's out there for this plan to work. The funds will never go to support the work they tell us it will. Hey by the way, where is all the pot money?
noahfecks, we always seem to be on opposite sides of the fence.

Yawn....

Please, we are trying to have an adult conversation here where someone can state an opinion based on limited information, and respectfully change an opinion based on new information. The info in my mailed ballot and associated primer is understandable, very limited. I welcome new information.

Please give me some new information other than tribalism the result of simple baiting. If "R's" did anything other than disable environmental(river, wildlife and human-kind) protections, destroy the inheritance of our children and trending toward screwing me as a retired or middle income professional; I might have more interest in your thoughts regarding D's vs R's.

Considering that, Colorado is blue, at worst purple and hopefully red is dead.

Considering that Putin has a "red" association; oh, well, never mind.
 

·
Definite maybe
Joined
·
754 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Wow. This went red and blue... they both suck in their own way. I was just trying to figure out if this water plan would be beneficial to me as a boater. The water plan sets goals but has no clear way of achieving them. I was hoping to be enlightened. As for sports gambling, who cares how idiots decide to waste their money. Not my concern i just dont want to be dooped into voting for something that hurts our river access, or only leaves me a trickle. I've read an article from an Aspen paper that shows that the ad campaign money for DD came from mainly the gaming industry but also from some ag group. From my experience, the ag industry does not always see eye to eye with us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
noahfecks, we always seem to be on opposite sides of the fence.

Yawn....

Please, we are trying to have an adult conversation here where someone can state an opinion based on limited information, and respectfully change an opinion based on new information. The info in my mailed ballot and associated primer is understandable, very limited. I welcome new information.

Please give me some new information other than tribalism the result of simple baiting. If "R's" did anything other than disable environmental(river, wildlife and human-kind) protections, destroy the inheritance of our children and trending toward screwing me as a retired or middle income professional; I might have more interest in your thoughts regarding D's vs R's.

Considering that, Colorado is blue, at worst purple and hopefully red is dead.

Considering that Putin has a "red" association; oh, well, never mind.

You should come out and do some target shooting with us some time Ron. Maybe we can even teach you how to pee standing up.


Not an R, not a D, honestly I dislike them about equally. That people think the end goal of one or the other is to serve the people is baffling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
Wow. This went red and blue... they both suck in their own way. I was just trying to figure out if this water plan would be beneficial to me as a boater. The water plan sets goals but has no clear way of achieving them. I was hoping to be enlightened. As for sports gambling, who cares how idiots decide to waste their money. Not my concern i just dont want to be dooped into voting for something that hurts our river access, or only leaves me a trickle. I've read an article from an Aspen paper that shows that the ad campaign money for DD came from mainly the gaming industry but also from some ag group. From my experience, the ag industry does not always see eye to eye with us.
If as you say you care about rivers you'd realize that R's rarely do anything to benefit the health of our nations rivers, wetlands, wildlife, forests, wildernesses, public lands, climate or private river runner access. Just saying.

I don't see anything nefarious about campaign money coming from gaming and ag(Full disclusure. I'm not a fan of gaming. I do like ag except when they waste and pollute waters and wetlands.)

Legalized gaming can hopefully be properly monitored and taxed as opposed to illegal gaming which is always criminal and never taxed.

Ag of course doesn't want to be taxed for being among the largest water users in the state. Besides, family owned ag is hurting already. In other words, they want someone else to pay for the solutions for a problem that they substantially cause, dried up rivers.

I'm surprised DD campaigning is not being likewise funded by development for the same reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
Chief Niwot,

Share with us please.

First, who is Gary Wockner, why is he so important and what is his contribution to this thought process leading you to decide NO? I guess I could search "Wockner" but that would relieve you perhaps of having the responsibility of expressing an independent opinion/interpretation. So please stand up and not be led and tell us why you think whatcha think. I and perhaps we would appreciate that.

Again, your interpretive input is most welcome on this potentially critical decision(aka, our vote). Hey man, I voiced my opinion to the point where I was told that I need to learn how to pee. Can't get worse than that(As if I care. Let me change that. I do care. No one is gonna take hold of mine to show me how.).

Thanks Chief,
Ron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
I will follow Gary Wockner's lead on this and right now he is a no on DD.
I checked on Gary. Nobel, admirable but short sighted thoughts. Virtually no solutions. Under DD an immediate objective is to put water back into the rivers in any way possible such as buying out farmer water rights.
https://www.greeleytribune.com/opin...-dd-it-will-dam-and-destroy-colorados-rivers/

His concluding remark in this link is that fossil fuels should pay for a solution which he totally blames on "fossil fuels"(FF)(climate change).

Gary, Mr Niwot, this problem started long before FF's contributed to our Colorado problem of dry river beds and degrading riparian health.

Get real Gary. You are using a popular scapegoat of the liberal left in a fashion that destroys yours and our credibility(considering that I'm a member of the liberal left). You want to poke your finger in the eye of the right even worse than I do(Greeley NewsPaper).

Let me say that even if "fossil fuels" up'ed the money to result in some solutions as he demands; first, it will likely never happen; second, it is not likely to happen soon; third, the solutions will likely at this point be the same.

Given the opportunity I'd proudly shake Gary's hand but then wag my finger in his face and scold him for not being a realist; a frequent problem of the far left and far right.

These are just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,674 Posts
Chief Niwot,

Share with us please.

First, who is Gary Wockner, why is he so important and what is his contribution to this thought process leading you to decide NO? I guess I could search "Wockner" but that would relieve you perhaps of having the responsibility of expressing an independent opinion/interpretation. So please stand up and not be led and tell us why you think whatcha think. I and perhaps we would appreciate that.

Again, your interpretive input is most welcome on this potentially critical decision(aka, our vote). Hey man, I voiced my opinion to the point where I was told that I need to learn how to pee. Can't get worse than that(As if I care. Let me change that. I do care. No one is gonna take hold of mine to show me how.).

Thanks Chief,
Ron
Gary Wocker is a founder and the current executive director of Save the Colorado and lives and breathes everything to do with the Colorado River and its management with an emphasis on maintaining the Colorado in a as free flowing a manner as possible. They are among the leaders of the movement to drain Lake Powell. Definitely a bit of tunnel vision and certainly very biased towards that view...but is certainly one of the hardest working advocates for River Runners rights on the Colorado too.

I don't intend to get political with this and see how it can be beneficial or detrimental to both sides. Some parts are concerning and others not. There is certainly municipal support for this in addition to conservationist and agricultural support as Denver Water is a sponsor and supporter of Prop DD and of the Water Implementation Cash Fund.

Its certainly a bit concerning know that funds from Prop DD could be used to build and maintain dams....but its also potentially useful for Conservation and keeping water in the Colorado River as well.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,101 Posts
A couple of things:

If it's the Colorado Water Plan, we're looking at really big picture stuff. There may be dams involved, likely studies on water use and availability, planning, development, etc. There may also be stuff like whitewater parks, or boat chutes at diversion structures (Silver Bullet on the Ark used State water project funds), and things like that.

I'm not supportive of legalized gambling. Gambling is an addiction that can get really expensive, that has social consequences and can really screw up the lives of the addicts and their families. With this in mind, I don't really care what the money's used for, I don't support it. If we, as a people, want to fund the great projects, conservation, and other things we shouldn't need to legalize something that's destructive to peoples' lives to do so. This is a tax that'll fall very heavily on some, while many of us who enjoy the benefits will pay little monitarily but may have to pick up the pieces of shattered lives around us.

-AH
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
772 Posts
Read about the issues, "be informed, not influenced", most of all, everyone please VOTE!
 
1 - 20 of 50 Posts
Top