Lincoln County Wind Emails
Content
Michael Sandoval
Sat 5/21/2016 11:10 AM
To:
[email protected]
Greg,
Below
you
will
find
an
excerpt
from
the
minutes
(also
attached)
of
the
April
18,
2016
Lincoln
County
Board
of
County
Commissioners
meeting:
The
Board
discussed
a
request
for
a
letter
of
support
for
Xcel’s
proposal
to
build
additional
renewable
energy
generation
in
Eastern
Colorado
and
a
letter
already
submitted
to
the
Denver
Post. Mr.
Ensign
provided
a
copy
of
a
sample
letter
that
Greg
Brophy
requested
the
commissioners
send
to
the
Colorado
Department
of
Regulatory
Agencies
Public
UtilitiesCommission,
as
well
as
a
copy
of
his
email
to
Mr.
Brophy
explaining
the
Board’s
hesitation
indoing
so.
The
email
informed
Mr.
Brophy
that
endorsement
of
any
yet
unpermitted
projects
that
would
require
any
permitting
decision
on
the
part
of
the
commissioners
could
be
perceived
as
prejudicial
and
inappropriate.
He
added
that
while
the
commissioners
certainly
agreed
with
several
of
his
points,
they
were
in
no
position
to
formally
or
informally
endorse
such
a
letter.
A
letter
claiming
to
be
written
by
Lincoln
County
Commissioner
Doug
Stone
appeared
in
theDenver Post;
however,
Mr.
Stone
had
not
written
the
letter.
County
Attorney
Stan
Kimble
felt
the
Board
needed
to
object
to
the
letter,
and
Mr.
King
stated
he
thought
they
should
send
a
letter
to
the
paper
denying
any
involvement
and
disavowing
the
letter
they
claimed
was
written
by
Mr.
Stone.
Mr.
Stone
commented
that
he
had
left
a
message
for
Mr.
Brophy
and
told
him
he
agreed
with
his
points
and
the
letter
sounded
okay
to
him,
but
that
he
would
have
to
speak
with
the
other
commissioners
first.
After
the
Board
agreed
that
they
could
not
appear
to
support
one
particular
energy
company
over
any
others
at
their
meeting
on
April
6,
Mr.
Stone
left
Mr.
Brophy
another
message
that
the
commissioners
had
agreed
not
to
get
involved.
Itwasn’t
long
after
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver Post.
Mr.
King
said
he
didn’t
have
a
problem
sending
a
generic
letter
in
support
of
renewable
energythat
did
not
back
one
particular
company
over
another,
but
he
certainly
did
not
want
to
endorse
the
letter
provided
by
Mr.
Brophy.
Mr.
Ensign
will
work
with
Mr.
Kimble
to
draft
a
letter
to
the
Denver Post and
will
have
it
available
for
the
commissioners
to
sign
at
their
special
meeting
on
Friday.
He
asked
if
the
Board
did
want
to
send
a
letter
of
support
to
the
PUC
and
it
was
suggested
that
the
paragraph
directly
referring
to
Xcel
be
removed.
I
would
like
to
clarify
a
few
things-‐-‐are
you
working
on
behalf
or
in
partnership
with
Xcel/Public
Service
Company
of
Colorado,
and
if
so,
in
what
capacity?
Does
this
include
a
wind
project,
as
yet
unnamed
in
the
minutes
but
now
scheduled
to
be
called
Rush
Creek?
In
the
minutes,
it
is
alleged
that
Commissioner
Stone
did
not
write
the
letter
in
question
and
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver
Post
without
permission.
Do
you
agree
with
this
assessment,
and
why
or
why
not?
Are
the
rest
of
the
details
submitted
in
these
minutes
by
the
Lincoln
County
BOCC
accurate?
If
not
(in
whole,
or
in
part),
would
you
like
to
amend
or
elaborate
where
the
commission's
minutes
are
in
error?
Any
additional
comments,
documents,
or
other
supportive
evidence
you
may
have
would
be
welcome.
I
would
appreciate
a
response
by
9pm
tonight,
May
21,
2016.
Best,
Michael
Michael Sandoval
Sat 5/21/2016 11:15 AM
To:
[email protected]
Members
of
the
Lincoln
County
Board
of
County
Commissioners,
Below
you
will
find
an
excerpt
from
the
minutes
(also
attached)
of
the
April
18,
2016
Lincoln
County
Board
of
County
Commissioners
meeting:
The
Board
discussed
a
request
for
a
letter
of
support
for
Xcel’s
proposal
to
build
additional
renewable
energy
generation
in
Eastern
Colorado
and
a
letter
already
submitted
to
the
Denver
Post. Mr.
Ensign
provided
a
copy
of
a
sample
letter
that
Greg
Brophy
requested
the
commissioners
send
to
the
Colorado
Department
of
Regulatory
Agencies
Public
Utilities
Commission,
as
well
as
a
copy
of
his
email
to
Mr.
Brophy
explaining
the
Board’s
hesitation
in
doing
so.
The
email
informed
Mr.
Brophy
that
endorsement
of
any
yet
unpermitted
projects
that
would
require
any
permitting
decision
on
the
part
of
the
commissioners
could
be
perceived
as
prejudicial
and
inappropriate.
He
added
that
while
the
commissioners
certainly
agreed
with
several
of
his
points,
they
were
in
no
position
to
formally
or
informally
endorse
such
a
letter.
A
letter
claiming
to
be
written
by
Lincoln
County
Commissioner
Doug
Stone
appeared
in
the
Denver Post;
however,
Mr.
Stone
had
not
written
the
letter.
County
Attorney
Stan
Kimble
felt
the
Board
needed
to
object
to
the
letter,
and
Mr.
King
stated
he
thought
they
should
send
a
letter
to
the
paper
denying
any
involvement
and
disavowing
the
letter
they
claimed
was
written
by
Mr.
Stone.
Mr.
Stone
commented
that
he
had
left
a
message
for
Mr.
Brophy
and
told
him
he
agreed
with
his
points
and
the
letter
sounded
okay
to
him,
but
that
he
would
have
to
speak
with
the
other
commissioners
first.
After
the
Board
agreed
that
they
could
not
appear
to
support
one
particular
energy
company
over
any
others
at
their
meeting
on
April
6,
Mr.
Stone
left
Mr.
Brophy
another
message
that
the
commissioners
had
agreed
not
to
get
involved.
It
wasn’t
long
after
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver Post.
Mr.
King
said
he
didn’t
have
a
problem
sending
a
generic
letter
in
support
of
renewable
energy
that
did
not
back
one
particular
company
over
another,
but
he
certainly
did
not
want
to
endorse
the
letter
provided
by
Mr.
Brophy.
Mr.
Ensign
will
work
with
Mr.
Kimble
to
draft
a
letter
to
the
Denver Post and
will
have
it
available
for
the
commissioners
to
sign
at
their
special
meeting
on
Friday.
He
asked
if
the
Board
did
want
to
send
a
letter
of
support
to
the
PUC
and
it
was
suggested
that
the
paragraph
directly
referring
to
Xcel
be
removed.
I
would
like
to
clarify
a
few
things-‐-‐Is
Mr.
Brophy
working
on
behalf
or
in
partnership
with
Xcel/Public
Service
Company
of
Colorado,
and
if
so,
in
what
capacity?
Does
this
include
a
wind
project,
as
yet
unnamed
in
the
minutes
but
now
scheduled
to
be
called
Rush
Creek?
In
the
minutes,
it
is
alleged
that
Commissioner
Stone
did
not
write
the
letter
in
question
and
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver
Post
without
permission.
Do
you
agree
with
this
assessment,
and
why
or
why
not?
Are
the
rest
of
the
details,
including
the
conversations
described
by
Mr.
Stone
and
submitted
in
these
minutes
by
the
Lincoln
County
BOCC
accurate?
If
not
(in
whole,
or
in
part),
would
you
like
to
amend
or
elaborate
where
the
commission's
minutes
are
in
error?
Were
there
any
subsequent
conversations
between
the
board
and
Mr.
Brophy
on
this
subject?
Any
actions
taken
by
the
Board
beyond
what
is
described
in
this
passage
from
the
minutes
on
April
18,
2016?
Any
additional
comments,
documents/emails,
or
other
supportive
evidence
you
may
have
would
be
welcome.
I
would
appreciate
a
response
by
9pm
tonight,
May
21,
2016.
Best,
Michael
Greg Brophy <[email protected]>
Sat 5/21/2016 3:36 PM
To:
Michael Sandoval
Cc:
Amy Cooke
Below you will find email confirmation from Commissioner Stone where he okays the
placement of a LTE that clearly references the Svaldi
piecehttp://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_29687033/colorado-farmers-reap-9-million-
payments-from-turbines and has nothing at all to do with any specific project.
Any commissioner from eastern Colorado understands that royalty payments make a huge
difference for farmers and ranchers in rural Colorado. Further, commissioners from a half
dozen rural counties know that property tax payments from wind farms provide much
needed revenue to provide basic services for their constituents. I realize the Denver-centric
think tank might be unaware, but rural Colorado hasn't experienced much economic activity
outside of agriculture and energy lately and ag and fossil fuel prices aren't exactly stellar at
the moment.
At a later date the full Board of Lincoln County Commissioners sent a letter to the PUC
stating, effectively, that as commissioners they wear two, or more, hats, they are chief
cheerleaders for economic development and responsible for permitting such development in
a manner consistent with the law and interests of their constituents. In that capacity they
believe that building wind farms is economically beneficial (let me shock you with
something - it is) and that they can acknowledge such without changing their duty to vet
and finally okay or deny permits for specific projects. In short they do their jobs.
Now, I have a question for you: why do you want to stop a project that benefits rural
Colorado without costing anyone else a dime extra? I'll expect your answer by noon
tomorrow.
Best,
Greg Brophy
It looks ok to me, go ahead with it
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 31, 2016, at 5:16 PM, "Greg Brophy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Attached is the LTE that we discussed. If you like it, I will get it placed in the Post
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Rich Coolidge"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Date: Mar 31, 2016 3:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Wind LTE 1
> To: "Greg Brophy" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Cc:
>
> No, here is a clean copy sans track changes.
>
> From: Greg Brophy
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 3:49 PM
> To: Rich Coolidge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: RE: Wind LTE 1
>
>
> I'm driving. Is the doc you sent back edited? Can I just forward to my commissioner?
> On Mar 31, 2016 3:41 PM, "Rich Coolidge"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Nice work. Just a couple edits.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Brophy
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 2:48 PM
> To: Rich Coolidge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: Wind LTE 1
>
> Got time to proof read this?
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please
visit http://www.symanteccloud.com____________________________________________
__________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> ______________________________________________________________________
> <Wind LTE 1.docx>
Greg Brophy <[email protected]>
Sun 5/22/2016 7:40 AM
To:
Amy Cooke
Cc:
Michael Sandoval;;
Jon Caldara
The problem I have is that you are picking on Lincoln County and for naught.
Think about this: the LC Board of Commissioners have little to no say over whether this
project is necessary or not. They have land use, siting and end of life oversight. Their
constituents, the landowners impacted by the project are private property owners. All, or
at least most of them, want the project built on land they own. Does II want to stand
between the commissioners and their constituents on that question?
You should be asking your questions of the government authority that has the obligation to
ask and answer the concerns that you raise, the Public Utilities Commission. Sending CORA
requests to Lincoln County is like beating up a third grader, for something they didn't even
do. That's what makes bothers me.
I'll let Xcel and the PUC defend their decision to build an electricity generating facility
themselves, but I won't stand by and let a Denver think tank take pot shots at friends of
mine in eastern Colorado.
Greg Brophy
Amy Cooke
Sun 5/22/2016 9:13 PM
Greg,
We
agree
with
you
about
the
Lincoln
County
Commissioners.
According
to
their
official
minutes
posted
on
line,
they
—
including
the
county
attorney
—
acted
appropriately,
which
is
why
we
asked
to
make
sure
those
minutes
are
an
accurate
representation
of
what
was
discussed
at
the
April
18th
meeting.
We
don’t
want
to
quote
something
and
then
find
out
that
a
corrected
or
different
version
exists.
We
also
wanted
to
give
you
a
heads
up
since
your
name
was
mentioned.
We
disagree
on
CORA.
CORA
requests
aren’t
“potshots.”
They
are
how
the
private
sector
—citizens
and
entities
—
keep
an
eye
on
what
government
is
doing
with
our
resources.
And
we
don’t
believe
that
definition
of
government
is
limited
to
state
government
located
in
Denver.
Any
one
who
runs
for
office
knows
CORA.
Those
who
believe
in
transparent
government
don’t
fear
CORA;
they
accept
it.
And,
yes,
some
even
welcome
it.
Finally,
you
calling
us
a
“Denver”
or
“Denver-‐centric”
think
tank
surprises
me.
It's
similar
to
me
calling
you
a
DC
or
Denver
resident.
It’s
inaccurate.
My
guess
is
you
are
aware
of
that,
but
EIS’s
strategy
seems
to
be
to
kill
the
messenger
to
deflect
from
the
economic
argument.
For
the
record,
over
31
years,
we’ve
garnered
tens
of
thousands
of
investors
and
supporters
from
all
over
the
state.
Just
as
you
don’t
live
in
Lincoln
County,
still
you
feel
like
you
speak
for
your
friends
in
Lincoln
County.
Well,
our
headquarters
aren’t
in
Lincoln
County,
but
our
supporters
there
feel
like
we
represent
them
too
and
that
goes
for
all
of
rural
CO
including
the
Western
Slope.
Fortunately
the
principles
of
limited
government,
transparency,
and
free
markets
transcend
geographic
location.
Otherwise,
Americans
would
never
know
of
Hayek;
Coloradans
wouldn’t
be
familiar
with
Milton
Friedman;
IJ
couldn't
defend
Douglas
County;
and
CEI
couldn’t
partner
with
II
to
explain
Colorado’s
"Great
Green
Deception."
But
I
know
you
are
aware
of
that
too.
Best
wishes,
Amy
Sat 5/21/2016 11:10 AM
To:
[email protected]
Greg,
Below
you
will
find
an
excerpt
from
the
minutes
(also
attached)
of
the
April
18,
2016
Lincoln
County
Board
of
County
Commissioners
meeting:
The
Board
discussed
a
request
for
a
letter
of
support
for
Xcel’s
proposal
to
build
additional
renewable
energy
generation
in
Eastern
Colorado
and
a
letter
already
submitted
to
the
Denver
Post. Mr.
Ensign
provided
a
copy
of
a
sample
letter
that
Greg
Brophy
requested
the
commissioners
send
to
the
Colorado
Department
of
Regulatory
Agencies
Public
UtilitiesCommission,
as
well
as
a
copy
of
his
to
Mr.
Brophy
explaining
the
Board’s
hesitation
indoing
so.
The
informed
Mr.
Brophy
that
endorsement
of
any
yet
unpermitted
projects
that
would
require
any
permitting
decision
on
the
part
of
the
commissioners
could
be
perceived
as
prejudicial
and
inappropriate.
He
added
that
while
the
commissioners
certainly
agreed
with
several
of
his
points,
they
were
in
no
position
to
formally
or
informally
endorse
such
a
letter.
A
letter
claiming
to
be
written
by
Lincoln
County
Commissioner
Doug
Stone
appeared
in
theDenver Post;
however,
Mr.
Stone
had
not
written
the
letter.
County
Attorney
Stan
Kimble
felt
the
Board
needed
to
object
to
the
letter,
and
Mr.
King
stated
he
thought
they
should
send
a
letter
to
the
paper
denying
any
involvement
and
disavowing
the
letter
they
claimed
was
written
by
Mr.
Stone.
Mr.
Stone
commented
that
he
had
left
a
message
for
Mr.
Brophy
and
told
him
he
agreed
with
his
points
and
the
letter
sounded
okay
to
him,
but
that
he
would
have
to
speak
with
the
other
commissioners
first.
After
the
Board
agreed
that
they
could
not
appear
to
support
one
particular
energy
company
over
any
others
at
their
meeting
on
April
6,
Mr.
Stone
left
Mr.
Brophy
another
message
that
the
commissioners
had
agreed
not
to
get
involved.
Itwasn’t
long
after
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver Post.
Mr.
King
said
he
didn’t
have
a
problem
sending
a
generic
letter
in
support
of
renewable
energythat
did
not
back
one
particular
company
over
another,
but
he
certainly
did
not
want
to
endorse
the
letter
provided
by
Mr.
Brophy.
Mr.
Ensign
will
work
with
Mr.
Kimble
to
draft
a
letter
to
the
Denver Post and
will
have
it
available
for
the
commissioners
to
sign
at
their
special
meeting
on
Friday.
He
asked
if
the
Board
did
want
to
send
a
letter
of
support
to
the
PUC
and
it
was
suggested
that
the
paragraph
directly
referring
to
Xcel
be
removed.
I
would
like
to
clarify
a
few
things-‐-‐are
you
working
on
behalf
or
in
partnership
with
Xcel/Public
Service
Company
of
Colorado,
and
if
so,
in
what
capacity?
Does
this
include
a
wind
project,
as
yet
unnamed
in
the
minutes
but
now
scheduled
to
be
called
Rush
Creek?
In
the
minutes,
it
is
alleged
that
Commissioner
Stone
did
not
write
the
letter
in
question
and
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver
Post
without
permission.
Do
you
agree
with
this
assessment,
and
why
or
why
not?
Are
the
rest
of
the
details
submitted
in
these
minutes
by
the
Lincoln
County
BOCC
accurate?
If
not
(in
whole,
or
in
part),
would
you
like
to
amend
or
elaborate
where
the
commission's
minutes
are
in
error?
Any
additional
comments,
documents,
or
other
supportive
evidence
you
may
have
would
be
welcome.
I
would
appreciate
a
response
by
9pm
tonight,
May
21,
2016.
Best,
Michael
Michael Sandoval
Sat 5/21/2016 11:15 AM
To:
[email protected]
Members
of
the
Lincoln
County
Board
of
County
Commissioners,
Below
you
will
find
an
excerpt
from
the
minutes
(also
attached)
of
the
April
18,
2016
Lincoln
County
Board
of
County
Commissioners
meeting:
The
Board
discussed
a
request
for
a
letter
of
support
for
Xcel’s
proposal
to
build
additional
renewable
energy
generation
in
Eastern
Colorado
and
a
letter
already
submitted
to
the
Denver
Post. Mr.
Ensign
provided
a
copy
of
a
sample
letter
that
Greg
Brophy
requested
the
commissioners
send
to
the
Colorado
Department
of
Regulatory
Agencies
Public
Utilities
Commission,
as
well
as
a
copy
of
his
to
Mr.
Brophy
explaining
the
Board’s
hesitation
in
doing
so.
The
informed
Mr.
Brophy
that
endorsement
of
any
yet
unpermitted
projects
that
would
require
any
permitting
decision
on
the
part
of
the
commissioners
could
be
perceived
as
prejudicial
and
inappropriate.
He
added
that
while
the
commissioners
certainly
agreed
with
several
of
his
points,
they
were
in
no
position
to
formally
or
informally
endorse
such
a
letter.
A
letter
claiming
to
be
written
by
Lincoln
County
Commissioner
Doug
Stone
appeared
in
the
Denver Post;
however,
Mr.
Stone
had
not
written
the
letter.
County
Attorney
Stan
Kimble
felt
the
Board
needed
to
object
to
the
letter,
and
Mr.
King
stated
he
thought
they
should
send
a
letter
to
the
paper
denying
any
involvement
and
disavowing
the
letter
they
claimed
was
written
by
Mr.
Stone.
Mr.
Stone
commented
that
he
had
left
a
message
for
Mr.
Brophy
and
told
him
he
agreed
with
his
points
and
the
letter
sounded
okay
to
him,
but
that
he
would
have
to
speak
with
the
other
commissioners
first.
After
the
Board
agreed
that
they
could
not
appear
to
support
one
particular
energy
company
over
any
others
at
their
meeting
on
April
6,
Mr.
Stone
left
Mr.
Brophy
another
message
that
the
commissioners
had
agreed
not
to
get
involved.
It
wasn’t
long
after
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver Post.
Mr.
King
said
he
didn’t
have
a
problem
sending
a
generic
letter
in
support
of
renewable
energy
that
did
not
back
one
particular
company
over
another,
but
he
certainly
did
not
want
to
endorse
the
letter
provided
by
Mr.
Brophy.
Mr.
Ensign
will
work
with
Mr.
Kimble
to
draft
a
letter
to
the
Denver Post and
will
have
it
available
for
the
commissioners
to
sign
at
their
special
meeting
on
Friday.
He
asked
if
the
Board
did
want
to
send
a
letter
of
support
to
the
PUC
and
it
was
suggested
that
the
paragraph
directly
referring
to
Xcel
be
removed.
I
would
like
to
clarify
a
few
things-‐-‐Is
Mr.
Brophy
working
on
behalf
or
in
partnership
with
Xcel/Public
Service
Company
of
Colorado,
and
if
so,
in
what
capacity?
Does
this
include
a
wind
project,
as
yet
unnamed
in
the
minutes
but
now
scheduled
to
be
called
Rush
Creek?
In
the
minutes,
it
is
alleged
that
Commissioner
Stone
did
not
write
the
letter
in
question
and
that
the
letter
appeared
in
the
Denver
Post
without
permission.
Do
you
agree
with
this
assessment,
and
why
or
why
not?
Are
the
rest
of
the
details,
including
the
conversations
described
by
Mr.
Stone
and
submitted
in
these
minutes
by
the
Lincoln
County
BOCC
accurate?
If
not
(in
whole,
or
in
part),
would
you
like
to
amend
or
elaborate
where
the
commission's
minutes
are
in
error?
Were
there
any
subsequent
conversations
between
the
board
and
Mr.
Brophy
on
this
subject?
Any
actions
taken
by
the
Board
beyond
what
is
described
in
this
passage
from
the
minutes
on
April
18,
2016?
Any
additional
comments,
documents/emails,
or
other
supportive
evidence
you
may
have
would
be
welcome.
I
would
appreciate
a
response
by
9pm
tonight,
May
21,
2016.
Best,
Michael
Greg Brophy <[email protected]>
Sat 5/21/2016 3:36 PM
To:
Michael Sandoval
Cc:
Amy Cooke
Below you will find email confirmation from Commissioner Stone where he okays the
placement of a LTE that clearly references the Svaldi
piecehttp://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_29687033/colorado-farmers-reap-9-million-
payments-from-turbines and has nothing at all to do with any specific project.
Any commissioner from eastern Colorado understands that royalty payments make a huge
difference for farmers and ranchers in rural Colorado. Further, commissioners from a half
dozen rural counties know that property tax payments from wind farms provide much
needed revenue to provide basic services for their constituents. I realize the Denver-centric
think tank might be unaware, but rural Colorado hasn't experienced much economic activity
outside of agriculture and energy lately and ag and fossil fuel prices aren't exactly stellar at
the moment.
At a later date the full Board of Lincoln County Commissioners sent a letter to the PUC
stating, effectively, that as commissioners they wear two, or more, hats, they are chief
cheerleaders for economic development and responsible for permitting such development in
a manner consistent with the law and interests of their constituents. In that capacity they
believe that building wind farms is economically beneficial (let me shock you with
something - it is) and that they can acknowledge such without changing their duty to vet
and finally okay or deny permits for specific projects. In short they do their jobs.
Now, I have a question for you: why do you want to stop a project that benefits rural
Colorado without costing anyone else a dime extra? I'll expect your answer by noon
tomorrow.
Best,
Greg Brophy
It looks ok to me, go ahead with it
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 31, 2016, at 5:16 PM, "Greg Brophy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Attached is the LTE that we discussed. If you like it, I will get it placed in the Post
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Rich Coolidge"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Date: Mar 31, 2016 3:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Wind LTE 1
> To: "Greg Brophy" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Cc:
>
> No, here is a clean copy sans track changes.
>
> From: Greg Brophy
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 3:49 PM
> To: Rich Coolidge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: RE: Wind LTE 1
>
>
> I'm driving. Is the doc you sent back edited? Can I just forward to my commissioner?
> On Mar 31, 2016 3:41 PM, "Rich Coolidge"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Nice work. Just a couple edits.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Brophy
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 2:48 PM
> To: Rich Coolidge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Subject: Wind LTE 1
>
> Got time to proof read this?
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please
visit http://www.symanteccloud.com____________________________________________
__________________________
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> ______________________________________________________________________
> <Wind LTE 1.docx>
Greg Brophy <[email protected]>
Sun 5/22/2016 7:40 AM
To:
Amy Cooke
Cc:
Michael Sandoval;;
Jon Caldara
The problem I have is that you are picking on Lincoln County and for naught.
Think about this: the LC Board of Commissioners have little to no say over whether this
project is necessary or not. They have land use, siting and end of life oversight. Their
constituents, the landowners impacted by the project are private property owners. All, or
at least most of them, want the project built on land they own. Does II want to stand
between the commissioners and their constituents on that question?
You should be asking your questions of the government authority that has the obligation to
ask and answer the concerns that you raise, the Public Utilities Commission. Sending CORA
requests to Lincoln County is like beating up a third grader, for something they didn't even
do. That's what makes bothers me.
I'll let Xcel and the PUC defend their decision to build an electricity generating facility
themselves, but I won't stand by and let a Denver think tank take pot shots at friends of
mine in eastern Colorado.
Greg Brophy
Amy Cooke
Sun 5/22/2016 9:13 PM
Greg,
We
agree
with
you
about
the
Lincoln
County
Commissioners.
According
to
their
official
minutes
posted
on
line,
they
—
including
the
county
attorney
—
acted
appropriately,
which
is
why
we
asked
to
make
sure
those
minutes
are
an
accurate
representation
of
what
was
discussed
at
the
April
18th
meeting.
We
don’t
want
to
quote
something
and
then
find
out
that
a
corrected
or
different
version
exists.
We
also
wanted
to
give
you
a
heads
up
since
your
name
was
mentioned.
We
disagree
on
CORA.
CORA
requests
aren’t
“potshots.”
They
are
how
the
private
sector
—citizens
and
entities
—
keep
an
eye
on
what
government
is
doing
with
our
resources.
And
we
don’t
believe
that
definition
of
government
is
limited
to
state
government
located
in
Denver.
Any
one
who
runs
for
office
knows
CORA.
Those
who
believe
in
transparent
government
don’t
fear
CORA;
they
accept
it.
And,
yes,
some
even
welcome
it.
Finally,
you
calling
us
a
“Denver”
or
“Denver-‐centric”
think
tank
surprises
me.
It's
similar
to
me
calling
you
a
DC
or
Denver
resident.
It’s
inaccurate.
My
guess
is
you
are
aware
of
that,
but
EIS’s
strategy
seems
to
be
to
kill
the
messenger
to
deflect
from
the
economic
argument.
For
the
record,
over
31
years,
we’ve
garnered
tens
of
thousands
of
investors
and
supporters
from
all
over
the
state.
Just
as
you
don’t
live
in
Lincoln
County,
still
you
feel
like
you
speak
for
your
friends
in
Lincoln
County.
Well,
our
headquarters
aren’t
in
Lincoln
County,
but
our
supporters
there
feel
like
we
represent
them
too
and
that
goes
for
all
of
rural
CO
including
the
Western
Slope.
Fortunately
the
principles
of
limited
government,
transparency,
and
free
markets
transcend
geographic
location.
Otherwise,
Americans
would
never
know
of
Hayek;
Coloradans
wouldn’t
be
familiar
with
Milton
Friedman;
IJ
couldn't
defend
Douglas
County;
and
CEI
couldn’t
partner
with
II
to
explain
Colorado’s
"Great
Green
Deception."
But
I
know
you
are
aware
of
that
too.
Best
wishes,
Amy
