Entries Tagged 'Military' ↓

Colorado Democrats Sen. Mark Udall, Sen. Michael Bennet, Rep. John Salazar and Rep. Betsy Markey sent a letter yesterday to conferees working on the fiscal year 2010 military appropriations asking them to maintain the moratorium on funds for expansion of the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in southern Colorado. Language continuing the moratorium is in the House-passed version of the spending bill, but not the Senate’s.

The federal government is dropping its appeal of a federal court decision that found the Army didn’t adequately assess the environmental effects of increasing training at its Pinon Canyon training site in southeastern Colorado, the Denver Post reports.

The U.S. Army said designating the lands included in the “Hidden Gems” wilderness proposal as wilderness would prohibit the military’s access to high-altitude landing zones used for training purposes, the Vail Daily reports.

Representatives of the Pinon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition are actively opposing former Rep. Scott McInnis in his campaign for governor, accusing the former Republican congressman of misleading the public with false statements about the expansion.

Representatives of PCEOC met with Scott McInnis in Walsenburg last week in an effort to explain why there is such strong resistance among many southeastern Colorado residents to the expansion.

After the meeting, McInnis’s web site characterized the meeting as one with “local ranchers who were justifiably upset by the Governor’s needless legislation attacking military jobs.”

PCEOC representatives say this characterization of the meeting is false, since no ranchers were there that weren’t against the expansion of the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site and they all support Gov. Bill Ritter’s (D) legislation.

McInnis has spoken in favor of Pinon Canyon expansion, saying it will create jobs in El Paso County and the I-70 corridor.

“McInnis has chosen the military industrial complex over the property rights, agricultural economy, and future of southeast Colorado,” said PCEOC president Lon Robertson in a statement. “We are a non-partisan organization. We are not endorsing any candidate, but we do feel compelled to counter the position of this candidate. The federalization of Colorado’s land and the militarization of the state’s economy are not the answer to our financial problems.”

Grady Grissom, a PCEOC board member, observed that McInnis’ position is ironic for a conservative.

“Ultimately, all wealth is created in the private sector,” Grissom said in a statement. “McInnis is proposing the destruction of private businesses and the federalization of private lands in order to subsidize local economies with federal tax dollars. I don’t see that as a conservative position.”

Robertson says PCEOC plans to mobilize its statewide network in opposition to McInnis’ candidacy. “We are fighting for the future of our community and our country and we are asking everyone that opposes the expansion to also oppose Mr. McInnis in his bid for office.”

Several state lawmakers from southeastern Colorado sent a letter yesterday to Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) asking them to stop the Army from using annexation laws to transfer Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site to Fort Carson, which Pinon Canyon expansion opponents fear would allow the Army to proceed with the expansion by circumventing a congressional funding moratorium.

The Army’s plan for the annexation was discovered two weeks ago as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request, but Army officials have denied any plans to annex the training site.

The state lawmakers are asking Bennet and Udall to attach an amendment to the defense appropriations bill, which may be up for a vote in the Senate as soon as this week.

Among those signing onto the letter are state Reps. Sal Pace (D), Wes McKinley (D), Buffie McFadyen (D) and Ed Vigil (D) and state Sen. Ken Kester (R).

The letter contends that an annexation of the Pinon Canyon site would allow the Army to spend money toward expansion of the facility in violation of the intent of the congressional funding ban.

“It is due time that the Army stop using backhanded attempts to force our farmers and ranchers off their land,” the letter states. “We beg you to stand up with the people across our state and nation opposing the expansion at Pinon Canyon.”

The Army has no plans for Ft. Carson to “annex” the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern Colorado, Army lawyers said yesterday, according to the Pueblo Chieftain. Opposition group Not 1 More Acre! had uncovered the annexation plan in documents received as part of a Freedom of Information Act request, but the Army’s lawyers said yesterday the plan was never approved.

Opponents of Pentagon plans to expand the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern Colorado yesterday filed a request with the Justice Department seeking confirmation that the Army will cease all activity connected to the expansion in compliance with a federal court decision issued last week.

The request comes after opposition group Not 1 More Acre! learned that Ft. Carson — the Army base in Colorado Springs — is pursuing an annexation of the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site, a separate military installation located 150 miles south of Ft. Carson.

A document titled “Sub-Installation Concept Plan” obtained by Not 1 More Acre! under the Freedom of Information Act reveals that Ft. Carson has requested an “accelerated” execution date of Oct. 1 for the annexation, according to expansion opponents.

On Sept. 8, a federal judge threw out the Army’s “transformation” environmental impact statement, saying it did not properly assess the environmental impact of the dramatic increase in facilities and activity expected with the expansion of Army training at Piñon Canyon. The new document ties the annexation of Piñon Canyon to the expansion plans.

Not 1 More Acre! is concerned that the Army may have the pieces in place for Ft. Carson to implement the annexation of Piñon Canyon, which the group contends would violate the decision handed down last week by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Matsch and the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.

For three consecutive years, opponents of expansion have won a congressional funding ban that prohibits spending for any aspect of expansion at Piñon Canyon. During those years, two bills against expansion have been passed by the Colorado legislature.

Stephen Harris, attorney for Not 1 More Acre!, has given the Justice Department until Sept. 23 to explain the Army’s position in writing.

A federal judge has ruled that the Army’s 2007 environmental analysis of its plan to train more troops at the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in southeastern Colorado was flawed, giving a boost to ranchers there who have been fighting the expansion plans, the Pueblo Chieftain reports.