UPDATE: Read below-- Part of Plan Cheyenne - This should scare everyone to death -( concerning groundwater in Laramie County Cheyenne, WY )- All new wells should be charged a graduated fee starting at $5000

UPDATE:  I found out at this time is not part of Plan Cheyenne - but it is still Important to what is happening here in Cheyenne, WY. 


This should scare everyone to death.  Be sure to open the attachment and read the minutes.  Farmers are important but we need to be careful on how we re-distribute money and that is what they are basing this on if you read between the lines.

The following is from Russ Dahlgren, a hydrologist I use who is very much in favor of our ability to practice our private property rights.  He is also able to wade through some of the garbage put forth in some of these "committees" and "boards" which are, once again, stacked in favor of the special interest group.

Marc W.


______________________________________________________________________


As you may know, there has been a lot of discussion concerning groundwater in Laramie County recently. A groundwater model covering the Laramie County Groundwater Control Area (which is approximately the area east of I-25, excluding the area immediately around Cheyenne) was completed in April 2014 by the State Engineer's Office and their consultants. This has started a rather rapid series of events.

On April 24, 2014, the Laramie County Groundwater Control Area Advisory Board recommended to the State Engineer that there is not enough groundwater in the Control Area to satisfy all of the groundwater users in the Control Area.

During their May 23rd meeting, the Control Area Board recommended, among other things that the fee for new well permits be increased to at least $5000. Refer to the attached pdf file for a brief summary of the discussion and recommendations from the May 23rd Control Area Board meeting.

The stated purpose of the increased fees is to provide funds for the "government" to buy out irrigated land, and then retire and abandon the irrigation wells, in the hope that this will decrease groundwater pumping and restore the water levels in the aquifers. Essentially what this means is that the irrigators, who are primarily responsible for the groundwater declines, are trying to make the rest of us pay them and buy them out, because they have mined a substantial amount of the groundwater under their farms. When I say primarily responsible, the vast majority groundwater level declines in the irrigated areas of Laramie County are due to irrigation wells. And even with the declining yields in some irrigation wells due to lower groundwater levels, approximately 90% of the groundwater used in Laramie County is still used for irrigation.

Another important recommendation by the Control Area Board and many irrigators in the eastern part of the County is to extend the Control Area Boundary west, to include more of the "greater Cheyenne" area and the areas to the west. The idea is that the expanded Control Area will provide greater management the groundwater in the county. Of course this will allow the Control Area Advisory Board, who is primarily made up of farmers and irrigators, to have a more active role in the regulation of groundwater, and in turn any development on more areas of the County.

My first recommendation to you is to immediately file applications for any wells that you see needing in the foreseeable future. Currently, stock and domestic well permits cost $50. Miscellaneous use wells cost $75.

My second recommendation is that you need to take the time to keep up with the current situation and possible new regulations. I have seen proposals by the irrigators and others in eastern Laramie County that will seriously impact economic development throughout Laramie County.

I have seen comments from this "group" that the State Engineer should prohibit any new wells in the Control Area, including those that tap deeper aquifers.

I have seen comments that the State Engineer and Laramie County should prohibit new subdivisions that rely on groundwater.

I have seen comments that the State Engineer should restrict pumping of the Cheyenne City wells.

I have seen comments that the State Engineer should regulate existing domestic wells, to the benefit of irrigation wells.

I have seen comments that existing groundwater users should be required to pay an annual fee for use of groundwater. Again, the primary purpose of this fee is to buy out irrigators.

Don't get the wrong idea about me. My family is from an irrigated farm in western Nebraska. I appreciate and understand irrigated agriculture.

But the idea currently being circulated is that the irrigators are innocent victims of the growth in the City of Cheyenne, and of developers, and of big bad oil companies. Other people have stole the irrigators water. The fact is that the irrigators own pumping is the root cause of the problem.

This side of the story needs to be presented. Otherwise, we may be unable to complete any new development, which relies on groundwater, from any aquifer, no matter how deep, for its water supply. The irrigators and other groundwater users in the eastern part of the County are becoming pretty vocal.

Russ D.

LCCA Advisory Board Mtg – 5/23/14


The following recommendations were approved by the Board to give to the State Engineer as he considers what to do with the model and his current order:

1. Extend the current temporary order until May of 2016. (an amendment to include all aquifers below Laramie County failed on a 2-2 vote.)

2. All new wells should be charged a graduated fee starting at $5000. The funds would go into a conservation or preservation fund for the Laramie County aquifers. (This is to buy out irrigated lands to reduce the amount of withdrawal.)

3. All users on a graduated scale should pay a fee for their water use. (This should be tied to property taxes.)

4. The entire county should be included in the control area. (This died earlier in the meeting because the motion excluded the city of Cheyenne.)

5. Adopt Lidstone’s attachment #3.

6. LCCA board supports SE & BOC in implementation.

7. SE should get input from NRCS, Conservation District, users, & industry prior to implementation & implementation should occur by September, 2014.

Thoughts:

A motion requiring all wells of 50 gpm or greater to be metered and have at least annual reporting died on a 2-2 vote as the board was worried about the cost to the farmers.

I expect this to be a longer term implementation as this will have to go to the Board of Control to expand the control area and they will have to hold a hearing. Also I expect the fees would have to go to the legislature for approval and determination of a mechanism on how to spend the fees.

The Advisory Board talked extensively about the city of Cheyenne and the use by subdivisions. They thought everyone should have skin in the game and should pay fees for their water use.

The big deal is where is the money coming from to buy out the irrigated lands to reduce the water use. The farmers want to be bought out to convert from irrigation to dry land farming.

Plan Cheyenne - By Bradley Harrington Cheyenne’s Downtown Development Authority (DDA): A Dinosaur That Needs To Disappear

May 21, 2014

 

The DDA: A Dinosaur That Needs To Disappear

 

By Bradley Harrington

 

“The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.” - Herbert Spencer, “Essays: Scientific, Political and Speculative,” 1891 -

 

Cheyenne’s Downtown Development Authority (DDA) just can’t seem to get any respect these days. And deservedly so, given its history, the way it spends money and some of its recent actions in particular.

 

First established in 1984, the DDA was formed to “plan and implement the restoration and improvement of the property within its boundaries.” So, has it accomplished any part of that mission in 30 years?

 

Uh, no. Sorry, but it’s been, to put it mildly, an absolute bust. As Greater Cheyenne Chamber of Commerce President Dale Steenbergen so trenchantly observed last week:

 

“‘When I look out the window of my office, I see a lot of empty buildings,’ Steenbergen said. ‘We believe that those empty buildings are caused directly by the regulatory environment in this community.’” (“Things tense for City, Chamber,” WTE, May 16.)

 

Well, Mr. Steenbergen, you nailed that one - and kudos to you for having the guts to stand up and say so.

 

Now, to be fair, not all of those empty buildings are to be blamed on the DDA - City regulatory policies in general, which were actually the main focus of Mr. Steenbergen’s comment, have much to do with that as well.

 

There’s certainly no denying, however, that the DDA has played a significant role in vacating those buildings: after all, consider some of the things the DDA sees fit to establish rules and regs on when it comes to downtown development:

 

“Building form and orientation, exterior surface treatment, facades, roofs, doors and windows, lighting, equipment, off-street parking, pedestrian circulation, equipment and service areas, fences and site walls, site lighting, rehabilitation principles, painting and color, treatment of storefront components, awnings, signage, additions to existing buildings, and minimum maintenance guidelines.” (“Downtown Guidelines,” DDA website.)

 

I’m appalled: I don’t see the proper shape of downtown business toilet seats on the list. Just an oversight, I’m sure.

 

As for spending money - taxpayer money, that is, through both mill levies and “TIF allocations,” which routinely comprise about 95 percent of the DDA’s budget - well, that’s a story unto itself. Consider some of these budgetary boondoggles, for instance:

 

► For the last three fiscal years, DDA staff salaries have consumed 39-42 percent of budget.

 

► And that’s not even counting things like consumer print ads, uniforms, equipment, board retreat and meetings, bookkeeping, legal counsel, lease payments, and other DDA operating expenses. Run the figures through the cruncher for FY2014 and you end up with a piddling 30 percent of DDA money actually being spent on “projects.”

 

► And when one examines what passes for a DDA “project,” one can only wonder if these people have lost their minds. So desperate to get somebody, anybody, to open a business downtown, despite all of the bureaucratic red tape they have placed in the way, the DDA is even willing to use your tax dollars to subsidize rent payments:

 

“A proposal now under review would give grants to new businesses downtown to help pay their rents.” (“DDA wants to help businesses pay rent,” WTE, May 13.)

 

Just the kind of businesses we want downtown, right? Incompetent losers who can’t even pay their own bills. Brilliant! Will the DDA also nix their required levy/TIF allocation payments as well? Nah, probably not.

 

Sounds like a litany of gravy-train, corporate-welfare, make-work schemes to me. I can only wonder how it feels, as a downtown business taxpayer, to be forced to pay these DDA people protection money for the “right” to be told what to do, when to do it and how to do it - and to watch their competitors be subsidized with that loot the whole while.

 

And people wonder why downtown buildings are running on empty? You have got to be kidding me. Most developers fled to the relatively unrestricted freedoms of Dell Range Boulevard long ago.

 

Once in a great while, however, justice does prevail: for, two years from now, Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power - the biggest victim of this levy/TIF abuse - will be moving its service center outside of DDA boundaries.

 

And the losses the DDA will sustain when that Cheyenne Light move completes? “DDA board members expect to lose about $500,000 by July 1, 2016, which is most of its budget.” (“DDA’s future in limbo when funds disappear,” WTE, March 23.)

 

Well, cry me a river. Goodbye and good riddance. And, who knows? Maybe, once this DDA dinosaur disappears, its current staff can find work digging ditches for the developers that will start flocking back to downtown afterwards.

 

Bradley Harrington is a computer technician and a writer who lives in Cheyenne, Wyoming; he can be reached at brad@bradandbarbie.com.

 

********************

U.N. Taking Over City Councils Across America! - Stacy Lynne educates We Are Change Colorado about the International Council on LOCAL Environmental Initiatives. An arm of the United Nations Agenda 21 and how they are using "GREENWASHING" to take over America.

Plan Cheyenne was talked about in this radio interview - KGAB 4 29 14 - Linda Heath - Running for Laramie County Commission in Cheyenne, WY. - This person is for big Gov't. She is not for "We The People" Listen

Those who helped us in Cheyenne, Wy. Have there own fight in Fort. Collins, Colorado - Farver & Lynne Corner Fort Collins On Smart Meters (Stacy Lynne, Virginia Farver and several Larimer County residents address the Fort Collins City Council regarding the city's implementation of Smart Meters)

Stacy Lynne, Virginia Farver and several Larimer County residents address the Fort Collins City Council regarding the city's implementation of Smart Meters. In particular the City of Fort Collins using Police Officers to FORCE a Smart Meter on Virginia Farvers house! Citing from numerous studies, the Staff get a valuable education on the science of Radio Frequencies, and the dangers of Electro Magnetic Fields.

Below is the latest report on the DDA's push to establish ArtSpace in downtown Cheyenne.

To All:

 

Below is the latest report on the DDA's push to establish ArtSpace in downtown Cheyenne.

 

Here's what we know:  ArtSpace is a PRIVATE REAL ESTATE ENTITY that uses PUBLIC (AKA Y.O.U.) FUNDS for this enterprise.  This entity ends up owning

the property involved in the project and the taxpayer is burdened with the debt.  Local example: Loveland's ArtSpace tab: $8.9M.

 

Here's Channel 5's glossy version minus the facts that might otherwise alarm a disengaged viewing audience.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Note: heavily emphasized to demonstrate the blind absurdity of, (and the destruction of all things private in), public/private partnerships:

 

Cheyenne, WY (KGWN) - Cheyenne's DDA has received the final results from Artspace on their pre-feasibility study after the organization visited Cheyenne in January.

Artspace determined a project in Cheyenne is viable.

The next step is to conduct an Arts Market Survey in Cheyenne by contacting 1,500 to 3,000 artists in the Cheyenne area.
The initial study cost the Cheyenne DDA $12,500.

The DDA is applying for a grant that would cover the $30,000 cost of an Arts Market Survey.

"If there is enough of a population of artists that are interested in that kind of living arrangement, then ArtSpace would consider doing a major affordable housing project and cultural arts center project in downtown Cheyenne," said Christie Depoorter, Executive Director of the Cheyenne Downtown Development Authority.

****DePoorter says the $500,000 in tax increment money it’s losing over the next two years with the move of Cheyenne Light should not affect the Artspace project.**** 

 

 

The never-ending lie continues, doesn't it?  The shortfall will be paid by the taxpayer, isn't that correct Ms. DePooter???_

 

 

Let the TRUTH give witness,

 

Betty S

 

From Laramie County commissioner Amber Ash - Some clarity on PlanCheyenne

http://www.wyomingnews.com/articles/2014/04/21/opinion/guest_column/01column_04-21-14.txt#.U1eo9CxOWM8
After reading the recent columns about PlanCheyenne and the misinformation contained therein, I wanted to inform the public about the amendments the Laramie County Commission made.

Specifically, I want to address how they relate to historic preservation; parks, integrated trails and open spaces; pedestrian-friendly streets; urban sprawl; affordable housing and design principles; and public involvement.

First, this was supposed to be an update to the 2006 version of PlanCheyenne. In some instances, the update went beyond the intended scope while, in others, it didn’t go far enough, which consequently resulted in several amendments.

It should be noted here that, although over 100 amendments were made, a lot of them were duplicitous due to the structure of PlanCheyenne. The document is so large and cumbersome that it reiterates itself in multiple places and consequently requires that the same amendment be repeatedly made.

For example, amendments 9 through 19 to the Transportation Plan are the same amendments verbatim to those made earlier in the Community Plan.

Furthermore, the amendments offered at the hearing were well considered, based on public testimony at the Planning Commission hearing and comments by Laramie County residents.

Contrary to statements within the columns, these people are not anti-planners and, in fact, consider planning to be an integral part of growth and development.

In regard to historic preservation, the amendments that were made were those offered directly by a member of the Historic Preservation Board.

We didn’t “discourage historic preservation” as stated in the column. Rather, we aligned PlanCheyenne to the mission and goals of the very organization responsible for implementing preservation.

Secondly, contrary to assertions made in the columns, the commission is supportive of parks, integrated trails and open spaces. For example, we struck language that would allow school playgrounds to suffice as parks because the former is an inadequate substitute for the latter.

There are many other examples throughout PlanCheyenne of our commitment to parks, open spaces and trails, including, but not limited to: Bicycle and Pedestrian (p. 30-31), Greater Cheyenne Greenway (p. 33) and Open Space/Greenway Corridor (p. 54).

Furthermore, the premise of Foundation 6 in PlanCheyenne is to create a “legacy of parks, open spaces and trails.”

Third, the commission supports pedestrian-friendly streets. The commission did elect to retain the 2006 PlanCheyenne definition of complete streets (multi-modal; multiple modes of transportation) in lieu of the proposed definition.

As such, the amended plan states: “The community will design and construct arterial and collector streets to be multi-modal by providing travel lanes for automobiles, bikes, buses, bike lanes, and sidewalks. Application of the Complete Streets policy will be limited to minor arterials and collectors so that the design focus for principal arterial streets remains efficient mobility.”

But the commission removed language found in Policy 4.2.B that would have removed and/or narrowed driving lines to install or expand sharrows (shared lane marking utilized when bicyclists and cars share the travel lane), bike paths and wider sidewalks.

In addition, we chose to remove the pedestrian coordinator that the plan stipulated.

Fourth, the sprawl around the city is a direct result of the city’s policies. The city’s decision not to extend water and sewer service even within the Urban Service Boundaries forces the county to develop ranchettes to comply with the State Engineer’s Office recommendation of eight acres per lot and Laramie County Health Department requirements for small wastewater systems of at least five acres per lot.

This means that unless city water and sewer is made accessible, lot sizes for the foreseeable future will be eight acres on average.

Fifth, the commission emphasized the need for affordable housing in the community. This included adding two measures of effectiveness to monitor the availability thereof and removing design principles that would have been prohibitive thereto.

On that note, these design principles are not congruent with recent developments n whether it be varying roof lines, orientation of buildings, alley-loading garages, unified streetscape, attractive fencing, coordinated building materials and colors, location of parking, or blocks on a modified grid-pattern.

In fact, even newer developments like Saddle Ridge, Deerhaven, Harmony Meadows, South Park and The Pointe do not fully comply with the principles in PlanCheyenne.

Sixth, the commission also amended the plan to provide additional opportunities for public involvement.

Without these amendments, inclusion of the public, boards and commissions, elected and appointed officials, and city and county staff in the comprehensive review process was optional; i.e. “should” as opposed to the definitive “will.”

For that matter, public hearings weren’t even included in the five-step amendment process prior to our revisions.

Finally, it should be noted that just because something has been modified or removed from the plan does not mean that it can’t or won’t occur.

In fact, the plan as amended states, “The Future Land Use Plan does not predetermine all land uses on individual parcels and is intended to provide deference to the market to help determine which uses are needed at a given time.”

Amber Ash is a Laramie County commissioner. Email: amberash@laramiecounty.com.

Published on: Sunday, Apr 20, 2014 - 11:40:55 pm MDT