Did you know railroads in CO can exercise eminent domain? An energy bill two-fer on March 20th. Related: Dem policy steps on wildfire mitigation? If I can do it, so can you!
Did you know that, per the Colorado Constitution, railroads have the power to execute eminent domain?
That is, if they think something they want is going to lead to "public benefit' they can condemn and purchase land. They are legally equivalent in our constitution to entities that build roads.
BNSF recently completed a pretty good sized land deal, in fact, to build themselves an intermodal terminal (a rail/road nexus where semi trailers can be put onto or pulled off of rail cars) and "logistics center" in Weld County. That land purchase was largely done via the railroad's ability to exercise eminent domain powers.
Now Hudson and Lochbuie are fighting each other over who gets to annex this plum into their taxbase. If you're curious you can read all about the rival suitors sparring in the article below. If the projections on the number of jobs and economic activity are accurate, this really is a good-sized economic opportunity, and I don't blame them.
That is IF the projections are accurate. Call me a cynic, but I can't help but think there's a fair bit of hype going on here.
More details and maps in the article.
https://bizwest.com/2024/03/03/hudson-lochbuie-spar-over-annexations-around-bnsf-facility/#djPop
SB24-165 Air Quality Improvements is up for committee on the 20th (along with its equally thoughtless cousin SB24-166).
If air quality legislation is a concern of yours (and I'll try to convince you why it should be below because it's not just rules for oil and gas that won't touch you), you have the chance to do a testimony "twofer" here.
You should take advantage of that situation and speak up if you can because both bills are bad policy.
Let's just go in numerical order, starting with SB24-165. That one is linked first below. I went to the bill's page and copied over three different things out of the bill's summary that I want to share. They are screenshots 1, 2, and 3.
I was disappointed to see that between an earlier post (linked second below the bill page) and now nothing has changed. I'll leave it to you to read up on my thoughts about this bill from earlier, but there is something I put here that I didn't touch on before.
Return to screenshot 3 attached and give it a look. Sound familiar?
I am not sure if you recall but there was an earlier effort (from about 2021 or so--see the third link below for some context) at what was (is?) called the Employee Trip Reduction Program. It would have been an effort done through the Regional Air Quality Council in Denver to reduce the number of miles that employees drive in going to work.
That is, it would have put that unelected board all up in how it is that you go to work and run errands by squeezing your employer.
This idea was scrapped after a lot of deserved pushback, but it looks like the sponsors of SB24-165 are ready to run it up the flagpole again, albeit a different one. This time, instead of CDPHE, they'll have CDOT do it.
If you read the wording, it seems somewhat innocuous, but if passed I want you to think about what this means in light of other "targets" the Assembly has set in the past. They have CDOT setting a number, the reduction in the total miles traveled by drivers. If it's a realistic goal, it'll get cast as being too small by environmentalists and the progressives in the Assembly that serve them. If it's too drastic and doesn't actually happen, then it'll be rationale for further policy.
It's just an opportunity for more lawsuits, bickering, and further clampdowns in other words. I suppose we don't have enough of that yet.
Let's pop on over to the other bill, SB24-166. It's linked fourth below.
This bill at first glance doesn't seem to be much more than redefining penalties for violations of existing air quality laws, and a large part of the bill actually does seem to do that.
But if you've read this page long enough you'll note some important things hiding down there in the text. Things that DO make significant changes that are worth noting.
Before talking about that, let me clarify something. I am for reasonable laws that prevent and/or hold accountable companies that knowingly or inadvertently release pollutants. However, as I have stated multiple times, the issue is as often HOW this is done as opposed to whether it's done. That is the main issue I take with this bill.
Take a look at screenshots 4 and 5 attached. They are from the bill's summary which you'll find in the link to the bill below. I highlighted the areas I found concerning.
If you're a fan of due process, letting CDPHE levy fines and civil penalties without court approval ought to be concerning.
Opening the doors to letting everyday people file complaints and civil actions is also troublesome. Surely this won't get used as a tactic to harass companies. Surely this won't get abused. The bill does state that these complaints must include notice to CDPHE, but I doubt this will have any sort of chilling effect. Not for the truly motivated environmentalist/community activist.
And what of the fruit of these complaints? This bill raises the civil penalty, allows the complaining party to get court costs, and then exempts any receipts from such efforts that the state gets to not be counted toward the state's TABOR revenue limit.
Again, surely no way that there will be abuse or unintended consequences here.
We don't live in the kind of world that it seems many at the Assembly see--a world where it's oppressed and capitalist oppressors. Businesses, even those that generate pollutants as part of the processes used to make their product, supply us with things we need, supply us with jobs, and fill in a large part of the tax base.
We should be careful in making sure to mitigate and reduce environmental problems from such activity, but a stance such as that required by these bills is ignorant.
It's ignorant because it doesn't recognize the fundamental reality of the world, namely that excessive regulation and allowing unreasonable court action will dampen or remove entirely the economic activity of some rather big and important parts of our economy.
And that loss will leave a hole that will cause suffering and/or require being filled some other way.
Any guess who will get to make up the lost tax revenue?
I hope you join me in speaking against these bills with testimony and/or an email.
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-165
https://open.substack.com/pub/coloradoaccountabilityproject/p/terrible-new-ozone-bill-sb24-165?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
https://coloradonewsline.com/2021/07/20/colorado-backs-off-plan-to-require-large-employers-to-encourage-reduced-car-travel/
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-166
Related: Dem policy about off road diesels will hamper wildfire mitigation efforts?
I'm not a lawyer and I'm not an expert but I was talking about this bill with a reader and they got me thinking.
SB24-165 above increases regulations on off-road diesels.
Their emissions. What kind of fuel they'll use. How much they can idle.
The very kinds of equipment that, say, someone removing dead wood for forestry management might use.
To, you know, mitigate wildfire danger.
So at the same time we want to start thinning forests to mitigate the number and destructiveness of wildfires here, we're going to start heavily regulating the equipment with which we do it.
Yet more unintended consequences for laws passed with no other constraint than that we must "think of the children!".
Perhaps the sponsors envision checked flannel and burly men with axes can do it all?
My testimony in front of the Producer Responsibility Advisory Board — If I can do things like this, so can you.
I posted in the past about the Producer Responsibility Advisory Board (see the link below if you want/need context).
I'd said that I planned to testify remotely at their meeting in my continuing effort to remind boards across this state that this is not how we should be problem solving.
I emailed what you see in the screenshot and did make it to the meeting to testify (by phone).
My testimony is nothing special. That is, it required nothing in the way of specialized knowledge about the packaging industry.
This does not make it meaningless. Any effort made to try and push this state back to center, any effort made to go to boards like these and remind them that there are whole swaths of the state that do not agree, is not wasted.
Don’t expect immediate and gigantic efforts, but you cannot ever know what effect you may have. That effect may be that someone else hears you and joins you in speaking up. It may be that someone on that board takes what you said to heart and decides to try and sway the board.
The only way to ENSURE that nothing happens is to do nothing.
Here is what I said to the board (I paraphrase here—I was outside working when my turn came and I ad libbed off my email):
“Thank you. My name is Cory Gaines and I’m a resident of Sterling, CO. I have two thoughts, two questions for you to consider. Is this the proper role of government? And, is this how we ought to be trying to solve this particular problem? I have seen a tremendous expansion of unelected boards in this state, boards that run a whole lot of this state and who lack accountability. They also cannot and do not represent the tremendous diversity of needs and views of the people of this state, which an elected body would do a better job of.”
“I listened to your earlier discussion about stakeholders and I’d like to point out that everyday Coloradans such as myself are not the people who are labeled as stakeholders even though we eventually get to pay for and deal with the consequences of your decisions. You also mentioned traveling and I urge you to do so. I urge you to go to different places in this state and seek out the opinions of a variety of Coloradans instead of simply listening to the same people reading the same things from the scripts prepared for them by activists. Thank you and I am happy to answer any questions you may have.”
If you are thinking about ways to get involved in this state, consider doing something like this. Consider finding an issue or board you're interested in (or hell even one you pick at random) and speak up, asking them "is this the proper role of government?"
If you need ideas, please ask. If anything you see here on this site would be helpful, it’s yours.
Get involved. If I can do it, so can you.
https://open.substack.com/pub/coloradoaccountabilityproject/p/taxes-are-up-costs-are-up-but-our?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web