The Gross Dam project violates federal law
Re: “Stopping the Gross Dam project will only hurt Denver,” April 13 editorial
Your editorial board seriously mischaracterizes the judicial process by describing a federal judge’s ruling as a “procedural quibble.” The fact is that the Army Corps of Engineers seriously violated the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Protection Act when it issued its permit. These acts of Congress are designed to protect the public interest and the environment.
The 86-page ruling was issued after careful consideration by a senior judge. It thoroughly details the many ways that Denver Water tried to game the system, and how the Army Corps failed in its oversight by issuing a permit with inadequate consideration given to a long list of less environmentally damaging practical alternatives. This is far from a “procedural quibble!”
Denver Water initially said it needed to expand Gross Reservoir because more water was required to address increased demand. However, they changed their story when their own conservation efforts showed a 22% decrease in use (in spite of population growth) over 14 years. Denver Water then said it needed to address an imbalance in its water supply.
The water for Gross Reservoir is pulled from a tributary of the Colorado River, an already highly strained resource. The likelihood of filling the expanded Gross Reservoir in the coming years, especially during drought, is extremely low. Denver Water has the capacity to find a 21st-century solution that addresses its concerns while also being environmentally sound and responsive to climate change.
Scott Engle, Boulder
Your editorial states, “It is not the duty of the Army Corps to find a … solution to Denver’s water needs, only one that satisfies federal law…” This is true. The federal court ruling clearly says the Corps and Denver Water did not meet this requirement. Actions found by the court are extensive and serious. They are plainly spelled out in court documents.
I live near Gross Reservoir. I would like to explain the reasons for the lawsuit. Dam construction is underway. Environmental damage to the reservoir’s east side has already occurred. We accept this; the damage is permanent. We want remedies for the agency’s deficient actions to prevent further environmental damage around the reservoir and to the Western Slope rivers due to ongoing construction and operation of the expanded reservoir.
Current dam-raise construction is approaching the 340-foot height of the original dam. The judge’s remedy orders the dam raise to be halted when it reaches the top of the original dam. Additional construction activities will stabilize the dam to provide safe, ongoing operations at the original height. Site restoration activities will be completed.
We want to halt further damage to western Boulder County, including the removal of 500,0000 trees, and prevent impacts on wildlife. More importantly, we are fighting to halt further diversions from the Western Slope headwaters of the Colorado River to protect these already severely depleted rivers.
Our focus should be on conservation – recycling single-use water and recharging underground aquifers. Expanding reservoirs is not the answer.
Timothy Guenthner, Boulder
Tariff rollercoaster is all about Trump’s power trip
Re: “The tariff saga is about one thing,” April 13 commentary
Although Jamelle Bouie’s comments highlighting both President Donald Trump’s complete lack of business sense and pathological personality may be valid discussion points, he and virtually all other op-ed writers are completely overlooking what’s really happening in the background: the consolidation of power in the executive branch.
By invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 – and with our Republican Congress condoning this – Trump now has ultimate market power. He is the kingpin of all markets, national and international. To wit, we have witnessed a series of plummets and surges in the markets. All this, in the name of tariff talks.
What’s the “one thing” this is really about? His true endgame may be to use markets for personal gain, use the U.S. economy as a political weapon, and consolidate power in the (his) executive branch. We’re watching pure genius at work here, and all to the detriment of the country. We’re nothing more than collateral damage at this point.
Jeff Sippel, Denver
This is a most excellent article regarding the tariff saga by Jamelle Bouie. The one thing that all these tariffs do accomplish is to bring attention to Donald Trump. We all know by now there is nothing Trump cares more about than himself. And now the world watches every day to see what he will do next. Increase tariffs? Pause tariffs? Who knows? And Trump is loving every minute of it!
Scott Underwood, Aurora
Did Sundance need that pricey incentive to move to Boulder?
Re: “Sundance flees as Utah becomes a hateful place,” April 13 commentary
With good evidence, the author argued that the Sundance Film Festival fled Utah due to concerns of an increasingly unwelcoming attitude towards many in the creative community. With such a strong push out of Utah, one wonders why Colorado felt compelled to give the Sundance elites tens of millions more of Colorado taxpayer dollars than any other contender offered to bribe Sundance to relocate.
Bob Marshall, Highlands Ranch
Editor’s note: Marshall is a state representative for House District 43.
The recent announcement that the Sundance Film Festival will relocate from Park City, Utah, to Boulder is more than a shift in geography — it’s a statement. It tells the nation what many of us in Colorado already know: Inclusion isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s good for business.
Utah lawmakers have increasingly targeted the LGBTQ+ community with harmful, discriminatory policies. From banning gender-affirming care to limiting the rights of trans youth in sports and education and even banning pride flags in public schools and government buildings, these actions have created an environment where many people, including artists, creators, and entrepreneurs, no longer feel welcome.
This is one more sign for those who still haven’t gotten on board. Vibrant, inclusive communities attract talent, investment, and innovation. Boulder offers all that and more. It’s a place where diversity is celebrated, where LGBTQ+ people are part of the fabric of daily life, and where the creative economy is thriving.
At Rocky Mountain Equality, we see every day how inclusion fuels progress. When businesses stand up for LGBTQ+ rights, they don’t just do the right thing; they create workplaces where people want to stay and economies that grow. Sundance, like so many other organizations, is putting its business where it can thrive.
Colorado isn’t perfect, but we are proud to be a state that’s moving in the right direction — toward justice, equity, and inclusion for all. And today, we welcome Sundance and the economic boon it will bring.
Mardi Moore, Boulder
Editor’s note: Moore is CEO of Rocky Mountain Equality.
Vaccine decisions should be based on welfare of person being innoculated
Re: “Kennedy’s approach to vaccines means we should look outside CDC for guidance,” April 13 commentary
Krista Kafer writes, “There is no downside to getting vaccinated.” That is not true. In fact, she later writes that some people react badly to vaccines. She then proposes that people should get vaccinated to protect those who cannot.
If someone gives a child medical treatment for the sake of someone else, it’s a sacrifice, not health care. The decision to give any treatment to a child should be based on that child’s well-being: compare the likelihood of adverse effects without the treatment to the likelihood of adverse effects from the treatment. Then, choose the option that puts the child at the lowest risk.
Dan Gryboski, Broomfield
Let’s continue the fight to protect child care centers
Re: “The cost of child care,” April 13 news story
It’s no secret that accessing affordable child care in Colorado is challenging, especially for small business owners and their employees. A lack of access to child care is a barrier to small business formation and growth and limits employees’ ability to work. These struggles underscore the importance of supporting small child care businesses so they can provide an essential service to their communities. That’s why it’s disappointing that the Colorado Senate failed to advance House Bill 1011, legislation that would’ve safeguarded the child care industry from the potential negative impacts of private equity.
With chaos at the federal level and potential funding cuts, it’s important for Colorado to protect our child care small businesses. Since most child care centers run on tight profit margins, they’re at risk of being acquired by investors who may be more concerned with profits than outcomes. Private equity-owned businesses are more likely to decrease the quality of services they provide and often lower the competitive health of local markets. And when private equity investors buy up large numbers of businesses in a single sector like child care, the resulting market consolidation has the potential to raise the cost of care for Colorado families, who are already overly burdened by climbing child care costs.
HB 1011 would’ve offered protection for small business owners and their employees from the rising costs that may result if a private equity firm acquires their local child care center. I urge our legislators to reintroduce this legislation next year so that child care entrepreneurs can continue to serve their communities, including small businesses.
Hunter Nelson, Parker
Editor’s note: Nelson is the director of Small Business Majority Colorado.
Train infrastructure easier to establish in smaller countries
Re: “Commuter rail is Front Range issue to solve,” April 13 letter to the editor
When comparing train travel in Europe to train travel in the U.S., one thing the letter writer and people in general overlook is that in Europe, a hundred miles is a long distance! You can easily fit the entire country of France into Texas and nearly two Germanies would fit in Texas.
During the first year of my “long tour” of duty in Germany, I traveled many times by train. It was easy. Every town had a train station. Many larger towns had more than one. All easy walking distance from where I would be staying. I took taxis only when the weather precluded a dry walk.
Here in the U.S., only large cities have train stations. It would be impossible to travel routinely by train between Cheyenne and Denver, for example.
Richard D VanOrsdale, Broomfield
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.