Sierra Club Indian Peaks Group
Questionnaire for Boulder County Commissioner Candidates 2008
(Note the Sierra Club message to me at the bottom of this page)
1. What are your major environmental achievements as an individual or as an elected official?
I have never been elected to public office. My major environmental achievements as an individual are maintaining an 80 acre farm in Oklahoma as a local wildlife preserve, driving 20 year old cars to avoid the energy consumed in producing new ones, and building a low carbon footprint house using photovoltaic electricity, geothermal heat, and super-insulated construction techniques.
2. It has become an informal custom in recent years that Commissioners specialize in certain aspects of Boulder County operations. Do you see yourself with a specialty, and, if so, what is it? What environmental issues related to that specialty might you pursue during your term of office?
My expertise and experience is in the areas of finance and accountability. I could be expected to press for data on the costs and benefits of any environmental issues that come before the Commissioners.
3. The Sierra Club is concerned about what we regard as an excessive reliance on chemical pesticides to control nuisance and West Nile-bearing mosquitoes, noxious weeds, pine bark beetles and real or perceived animal pests on County lands. Would you support the formation of a new scientific advisory board, with a balance of agronomic and ecological experts, to advise the Commissioners, the County Health Department and County Parks and Open Space on these management issues?
Having had a family member with a “West-Nile” experience a few years ago, I am biased on this question. However, my major bias in any decision making process is to rely on data rather than on concern. If a scientific advisory board such as you describe could be created with volunteer experts and staffed and operated within the existing county budget, it is appropriate for the Commissioners to make decisions with input from such a body.
4. What can the county do to better protect wildlife? For example would you support an ordinance regulating trash collection to reduce the number of “nuisance bears?”
Human and wildlife encounters are a fact of life in Boulder County. Aside from a minimal educational campaign that essentially says “don't be stupid with your trash”, there is no role for Boulder County.
5. As a County Commissioner how would you support the regional transit expansion? How could the county improve its local transportation structure in order to best complement the FasTracks build-out and improve transit ridership? Would you be in favor of a ballot initiative for trails and transit similar to the one that failed in 2006? How would it differ from the 2006 initiative?
Riders on a transit system should pay the full cost of ridership. Transit ridership will only increase when gasoline cost approaches world levels. To complain about subsidized oil companies and simultaneously complain about high fuel prices while urging increased subsidy for transit systems is inconsistent. I will oppose any ballot initiative that proposes an increased role for Boulder County government.
6. How can the Sustainability Program be implemented effectively? Do you consider the goals realistic? What leadership role do you see for yourself in increasing energy efficiency? Would you favor the county signing on as a Sierra “Cool County”? Do we need more funding to provide local incentives, e.g. lowered permit fees, rebates, low interest loans, to encourage residential and commercial solar electric, solar thermal and wind as well as more educational programs for the public? How would these monies be raised, if needed?
An 80% reduction of CO2 emissions worldwide by 2050 is not possible with today's technology without economic devastation. Technological change occurs when markets respond to price signals. Incentives bias the information that price signals provide. Boulder County is 1/10 of 1% of the US. To assume that we should tax ourselves to provide bad price information and inhibit technological change is faulty thinking. That being said, I've built a house with a very low carbon footprint, because of price biases that resulted from legislation that should not have been passed. Perhaps leadership is taking advantage of illogical legislation.
7. What steps can be taken to strengthen the Super IGA and how does that impact the boundaries of cities in the county which may annex adjoining land?
The Boulder County Countywide Coordinated Comprehensive Development Plan is a framework for annexation and development that has been in place for less than five years. I don't believe that adequate analysis of the impact of the current agreement has been performed so that one could conclude that the current agreement should be strengthened. Making decisions and commitments without data or analysis is reckless.
8. There is an increasing conflict between using open space tax monies to manage existing properties and acquiring new properties as availability of property diminishes and recreational demands grow. Where do you place yourself on this spectrum of management verses acquisition? Similarly, there is a conflict between buying lands to preserve prime farm land and agricultural potential and buying lands chiefly for recreation or wildlife habitat. Where would you place yourself on that spectrum?
The conflict between open space and housing, particularly moderately priced housing, in Boulder County is real and will get more intense. Purchase of additional open space property should be limited to no more than can be bought with the existing debt that has not been expended. The 2006 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (the latest available at this time) indicates that the bulk of the $197,310,000 long term bonds outstanding at that time was debt issued for open space purposes. Buying more open space simply increases the cost of housing in Boulder County. Management of what we have should be the priority.
9. Do you see a role for the County to influence the development (public transportation access, housing, ‘green building’) of the Conoco-Phillips property?
The Conoco-Phillips property represents a transaction between a willing buyer and a willing seller. The property resides within the boundaries of Louisville. Both the buyer and the seller had adequate time for due diligence prior the transaction. That due diligence was based on the regulations in place in Louisville. Boulder County has no role in trying to manage a private development that was designed for another jurisdiction.
10. In light of increasing precious metals prices and pressures to reopen old mines and milling operations, and in light of potential threats to water supplies posed by (for example) cyanide-based ore milling, would you support a County ordinance to ban such operations in Boulder County, as Summit County has done, below?
(3812.04: Open Mining/Use of Cyanide or Other Toxic/Acidic Ore Processing
Reagents. Any mining or milling operation that utilizes cyanide or other toxic/acidic ore processing reagents in heap or vat leach applications shall not be allowed in any zoning district.)
The question provides no data regarding the extent of the potential problem. Passage of legislation without adequate data, based solely on what “Summit County has done”, is reckless. It is not proper to base a decision on such limited information, so I will take no position.
11. What is your stance on house sizes in Boulder County?
The act of changing house size limitations recently enacted by Boulder County is effectively a taking of property rights and will likely be challenged in court. House sizes are a personal choice and should not be limited for the reasons and in the manner enacted by the Commissioners. The square footage being constrained by the Commissioners’ decision is immaterial in the context of the total house square footage of Boulder County.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr. MurphyThe Sierra Club Indian Peaks Group Political Committee has reviewed your Questionnaire requesting consideration
for Endorsement. We thank you for your interest in and commitment to caring for the environment. We alsocommend you for wanting to be of service to your community. We hope that if you continue to seek public officeyou will find common ground with Sierra Club goals and purposes. We thank you for your careful answering ofour questions.However, in this election we have decided not to endorse you.Again, thank you,David and Sharon ConleyCo-chairs IPG Pol. Com.