Polis -vs- Kennedy: Who Will Protect Colorado’s Rivers?
Colorado’s governor’s race is heating up, with a likely two-person contest in the Democratic Party — Jared Polis -vs- Cary Kennedy — as we head into the June 26, 2018 primary. I have watched the race closely, but from a distance, with an eye towards how both candidates would protect Colorado’s rivers[1], which is my professional specialty as the director of river protection organizations in Colorado. Colorado’s rivers — which are already severely depleted — face a barrage of dam and diversion threats in the face of our rapidly growing population and the bad river protection policies of our current governor, John Hickenlooper. Below is my brief analysis of the two candidates’ river protecting platforms as listed on their website, with some additional background material on Polis who has a long speaking and voting history as a U.S. Congressmember.
Polis: Jared Polis’ platform on “water” is listed on his website here (click on “issues”, then click on “environment” then scroll down to the section which starts with the quote “Here is a land where life is written in water”). Polis makes it clear that he “…supports the first Colorado Water Plan developed under John Hickenlooper…” and that he will strive to implement that plan including “conservation measures.” As I have widely stated in newspaper op-eds as well as radio interviews, the Colorado Water Plan has serious problems and has been poorly implemented — in fact I’ve called it the “Colorado Dam Plan”.
Polis then commits to both conservation and storage of 400,000 acre feet of water, respectively, and then he commits to the “stream management” and “watershed protection” goals outlined in the Colorado Water Plan. Polis then commits to “updating the Colorado Water Plan” with pretty vague language except for a bigger commitment to “water reuse”. In the next bullet point, Polis says he will “resist federal efforts to dictate water decisions” and “resist efforts to export our water to moneyed interests outside our state”. Some of this language is troubling — 400,000 acre feet of new storage likely requires massive new dams and diversions, and his hints at anti-federalism and “water exported” smell like a state policy that could try to drain rivers before they reach the state line.
In the next bullet point, Polis correctly calls “transmountain diversions” an “existential threat to the health of our rivers”. But he then says he supports the “conceptual framework” and its “seven principles” that would govern new transmountain diversions. He goes on to say the most troubling statement of all, that he would “enforce” the conceptual framework which includes building the “already identified projects and processes (IPPs)” prior to a new transmountain diversion. Those “IPPs” include a long laundry list of projects across the state including every currently proposed dam and diversion such as the extremely controversial expansion of Gross Dam in Boulder County (it is called the “Moffat Collection System Project”, which would build the tallest dam in the history of Colorado) as well as the massive and extremely controversial “Northern Integrated Supply Project” (NISP) on the Cache la Poudre River. To be clear, Polis’ website does not say he supports any particular IPP, only that he supports the conceptual framework which says the IPPs should be built first, before a new transmountain diversion.
On those two particular controversial projects — NISP and Moffat — I can find no public statements from Polis indicating support or opposition to either project. As a Congressmember, Polis has publicly supported lengthening the public comment periods for both projects in the past, and supported strong public involvement in those permitting decisions.
In addition to Polis’ statements on his website, he has a long history of speaking and voting in Congress to support the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Environmental Policy Act, all three of which are integral to river protection in Colorado. He routinely has one of the strongest pro-environment voting records in Congress, including on myriad river and water protection issues.
Kennedy: Cary Kennedy’s “full plan for Water” is listed in two places on her website, under “Energy and Environment” and “Planning for Growth”. The title of this section of Kennedy’s website is, “Conserve Water and Protect our Rivers”.
Kennedy’s website makes several strong statements about protecting the health of Colorado’s rivers and addresses the big-kahuna problem our rivers face: rapid population growth. She says right off the bat: “We must protect Colorado’s treasured water for the future, especially in the face of rapid growth, so that Colorado’s families have clean drinking water and Colorado’s rivers stay healthy.” Kennedy’s website also says point-blank, “We cannot continue to take more from our rivers,…” Further, in a public debate in August 2017, the Colorado Independent reported that Kennedy made the same public statement, “Kennedy said the solution is not to take more water out of rivers.”
Kennedy’s website says she will “invest in and implement the State Water Plan” — which is problematic, in my opinion, as I noted above — but then she only calls out the “conservation” goal, not the “storage” goal, when she says, the plan:
“…establishes a goal of conserving 400,000 acre-feet by 2050, a 35% reduction. Achieving the goal will mean reducing per-capita water demand by about 1% per year by 2050.”
Kennedy goes on to list her “Promote Conservation First” goals for water, and the rest of the wording is solely about conservation and other pro-environment positions, not storage or dams/diversions. Finally, Kennedy’s website specifically calls out river protection in the last bullet point, where it says: “Support Instream Flow Program: We need to continue to support, fund, and expand the instream flow program to protect our rivers and their ecosystems.”
I can find no public statements by Kennedy about either extremely controversial project, the Moffat Collection System Project or the Northern Integrated Supply Project. Of note, Kennedy did serve as Deputy Mayor of the City of Denver from 2011–2017, and Denver Water — whose board is appointed by the Mayor of Denver — is the applicant for the Moffat Collection System Project, and so it would be assumed that any appointed official, while in that job, would be required to support the goals of Denver Water.
Summary: Based on their websites and other history, there are pros and cons of both candidates on river protection issues. The statements on Kennedy’s website are much stronger, but she has very limited experience in dealing with water and river protection issues, and so the rubber has never really had to hit the road for her. Polis has more troubling language on his website, but has a very long history of being a stronger environmentalist on many issues, and has been very supportive to the environmental community’s interests and requests in the past.
****
[1] Disclosure: I have donated $100 to Polis and $35 to Kennedy, as well as co-hosted a fundraiser in Fort Collins for Polis. I am not otherwise involved with either campaign.
