|
<br />UISlflCIS
<br />take up
<br />water
<br />battle
<br />
<br />, Arapahoe hands off
<br />fight for Union Park
<br />
<br />By Angela Cortez
<br />Denver Post Staff Writer
<br />The Arapahoe County commtssion will
<br />let six local water districts take over the
<br />light to build the controversial $1 billion
<br />Union Park water project,
<br />Six Arapahoe and Douglas county water
<br />districts have pledged their support to fur-
<br />ther the Union Park project, a high-aill-
<br />tude reservoir to store and pipe Western
<br />Siope water to the Front Range.
<br />Arapahoe County Commissioner Marie
<br />. Mackenzie, a backer of the Union Park
<br />project, gathered support from area water
<br />districts after a Western Slope water-court
<br />judge last spring rejected Arapahoe Coun-
<br />ty's claim to Western Slope water for the
<br />project.
<br />
<br />Must appeal within coming week,
<br />
<br />The county must appeal to the Colorado
<br />Supreme Court wIthin the coming week,
<br />After that, responsibility for Union Park
<br />will be in the hands of the water districts:
<br />If the water-court's ruling is overturned,
<br />the project could provide a renewable sup-
<br />ply of water to Front Range residents whO
<br />currently use groundwater, A growing
<br />number of underground wells in Arapahoe
<br />and Douglas counties are drying up as un-
<br />derground aquifer veins are stressed by
<br />growth,
<br />"The board believes it is important to
<br />work toward the development of renew-
<br />able water supplies," Cottonwood Water
<br />and Sauitation District manager Patrick
<br />Mulhern told the commissioners in a letter
<br />faxed to them during the meeting,
<br />
<br />Board vote unanimous.
<br />
<br />In addition to Cottonwood, the districts
<br />that will take over the Union Park project
<br />and fund litigation include Arapahoe Cou~,
<br />ty Water and Wastewater, Cherry Cree~
<br />Valley W~teK, ~~sl Cherry Creek Vaney
<br />Wate~ and. Sanit~iiQ.ll District, Parker Wa-
<br />terand Sanitation, .and Rangeview Metrl)-
<br />politan Distri,s:t. . .
<br />Some county commissioners have said
<br />the county shouldn't be in the water busi-
<br />ness, so when the districts stepped in, the
<br />live-member board voted unanimously to
<br />file the appeal and turn over the project to
<br />
<br />Please see WATER on 68
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Local districts to take over
<br />county water-project fight
<br />
<br />WATER from Page 18
<br />
<br />w'ater districts,
<br />"We have three members of this
<br />board who didn't want to pursue
<br />the project so rather than letting
<br />$3,8 million go down the drain, so
<br />.to speak, Commissioner (John)
<br />Brackney and I decided to restruc-
<br />ture the project and get water dis-
<br />tricts to come in," Mackenzie said.
<br />"It was for their benefit to take it
<br />over anyway."
<br />Aurora city officials have op-
<br />posed Union Park because some
<br />Arapahoe Connty residents, who al-
<br />ready pay for Aurora city water,
<br />would pay twice if commissioners
<br />continued to use tax money to pur-
<br />sue Union Park rights, Tral)Sfe;-
<br />. ring the project to local water dj~,
<br />!ricts m..' e.a.nscoun.ty. t.ax. dollarl
<br />would n9 longer be used towa~\I
<br />UQiQn Pauk,
<br />"My district is in Aurora, but the
<br />community as a whole needs this,"
<br />'.. ChaIrwoman Debra Vickrey said,
<br />"With the level of development in
<br />the county, we clearly need a re-
<br />newable water source."
<br />!lut not everyone was pleased
<br />that the water districts will take
<br />
<br />. over the fight for Union Park, Mike'
<br />Mueller, a member of the Arapa- :
<br />hoe Water Alliance, which formed
<br />to oppose Union Park, 'said the .
<br />county should implement more ag- i
<br />gressive water-conservation pro- \
<br />grams instead of letting the water
<br />dIstrict loose to flood a mountain
<br />meadow.
<br />"I have serious concerns about
<br />the environment," Mueller said. "I
<br />think there are alternatives,
<br />"I think there is still the idea
<br />that Union Park is the silver bullet
<br />that will solve all of our water.
<br />problems," he said. J'
<br />Union Park would be nestled in a !
<br />mountain bowl at 10,000 feet, 25 .
<br />miles east of Crested Butte, It r
<br />would store water diverted during;
<br />wet years from the headwaters of .;
<br />the Taylor River, which flows into;
<br />the Gunnison River. l
<br />~ A series of pipes and tunnels ~
<br />would transport the water to the ,:
<br />South Platte River and then to f
<br />Front Range users, :'
<br />Backers of the project say it ,(
<br />would yield 70,000 to 100,000 acre-I
<br />feet of water a year, enough to sup-
<br />ply about 100,000 families, I
<br />
|