Posted 7 months, 7 days ago in 
Loading ...
On the one-year anniversary of Craig Meis’s announcement that the county’s energy master plan was 75 percent complete, we read in The Daily Sentinel that he wants to spend $170,000 to complete a plan that wasn’t really started.
On April 16, 2007 the city of Grand Junction and the town of Palisade met with Genesis Gas & Oil LLC to publicly discuss the work that had been done on our watershed plan — comprehensive plan that involved innumerable hours spent creating best management practices for guiding drilling operations in our pristine watershed. The stakeholders included the public, regulatory and cooperating agencies. Mayor Doug Edwards of Palisade, myself and others were surprised when Commissioner Meis for the first time acknowledge he personally had completed 75 percent of the county’s Energy Master Plan, a two-page document and a Web site map.
Now with an election year upon us, Le Roy Standish reports there is an “expressed eagerness to spend county dollars on the effort.” I already have the model for putting together an energy master plan for Mesa County in our watershed plan and really don’t care to waste taxpayer money reinventing the wheel.
It’s my goal when addressing growth, energy and land use issues, to consider all natural resources, not only oil, gas, coal and uranium, but water, air, wildlife and open spaces as well. I have no conflicts of interest when it comes to energy development in Mesa County.
JIM DOODY, Candidate
Mesa County Commissioner
Grand Junction
40 Responses to “County commissioners should have no bias when addressing issues”
Posted April 16th, 2008 at 2:17 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thank you for expressing this, Mr. Doody. As it’s commonly known, Comm. Meis is a bully & thug, and is on the record in several places speaking against any sort of watershed plan or protection program (in his pre-Commiss days also, when he was on the Planning Comm.).
Quite simply, he exists only as a handmaiden to the oil & gas industry, and delivers only those answers they are expecting. It’s not a complicated process - just one based on personal greed & public deceit. Gawd knows what Meis promised to Genesis O&G in their initial, private meetings. The so-called Energy Master Plan is a farce, with no substance & no teeth or real significance.
Hopefully Mesa County residents are fed up with people like Meis, and the very best outcome is seeing him disaappear into the woodwork after November’s election.
Posted April 16th, 2008 at 8:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
What a bunch of pompous drivel. Jim Doody should get a job (the honorary position of mayor does not qualify), get a paycheck and buy some advertising.
The above comment is even more self-important than the original letter.
Posted April 16th, 2008 at 8:54 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mr doodle, why did you register as a Republicn if you have zero Republican standards?
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 7:12 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
So, scoffing at any effort to protect the environment, and wasting taxpayer dollars have become some people’s idea of “Republican standards.”
Baffling. Some of my best friends are Republicans but THEY actually believe in conservation — of the land and of our hard earned money. That what (so they say) the GOP used to be about. I’m not a Republican but I wish more of those that were, were more like Mr. Doody and less like Mr. Mies.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 7:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Dear Tonya,
My comment was aimed directly at his ‘honesty’ of which there is little visible.
Mr. doodle has no leanings towards conservation of either the land or our money.
He’s looking at two things. The money county commissioners get paid, and the further destruction of the RIGHTS of the county and givingg more power to the city of grand junction. The same as spehar, genova, baughman, etc ad nauseating.
The same with the little twerpish person from mesa.
They can’t declare as a democrat becaue they probably won’t get elected, and it’s a known fact that the local ‘republicanparty’ will take anybody regardless of prior political affiliations.
So, be very careful what you vote for.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 8:42 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, I do not claim to know much about Mr. Doody, but he appears to speak the truth about Mr. Meis.
At the BOCC board meeting April 23, 2007 Mr. Meis audibly scoffed at the name of Dr. Theo Colborn and her life’s work on endocrine disrupting chemicals.
Not only is Dr. Colborn a gentlewoman and one of Western Colorado’s “own,” her groundbreaking research has already earned her a place in history alongside the likes of J.I. Rodale and Rachel Carson.
When Craig Meis scoffed and referred to her as “that Theo Colborn” it spoke volumes about his complete and total lack of regard for the environment.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 9:40 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
So Tonya, are you one of these environmentalists? Belong to an environmental group?
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 9:42 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
What if she does? Does that invalidate her opinion?
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 10:35 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
…one of these “environmentalists”? Rexall, that label went out of style way back somewhere in the mid-1990’s. Do you consume food regularly, subsist primarily on water, and filter thousands of liters of air thru your lungs everyday? News flash - you’re one of them - one of “these environmentalists.”
You got no future, big guy, without the sun, clouds, rainfall, wind, trees, soil, and bacteria crawling all over your body. Conversely, all of those things will be fine once you & I (and the other 6 billion) depart this fragile place. No amount of praying or name calling will help you out. Sorry.
Back on topic - what sort of depraved/desperate desert civilization would contemplate drilling in the middle of their only water supply? One that only worships money and a quick fix? Precisely the world occupied by the ilk of Meis, Rexall, et al.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 11:31 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ha ha, yeah, I’m one of “these environmentalists” Rexall. Not by the groups I may or may not “belong to” but by my philosophies and daily attempts, (sometimes successful and sometimes not so), to minimize the negative and enhance the positive that my existence may have of the future of the planet.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 11:38 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Aw, heck and shoot-fire, Tonya….you crazy, wacky environmental types. The earth’s only 6,000 years old, anyways…and, pretty soon, the big white-haired guy in the sky who’s infinitely powerful (but needs our money) is gonna wipe it all clean and start over…so, what’s the big fuss??
You probably even recycle, too…don’t you?
You Hippie.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 12:17 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hey Curmudgeon, it takes one to know one, heh heh.
And yes I recycle … even THOUGH Michael Moore said we shouldn’t bother, ha ha
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 12:29 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Actually, I don’t know Mr. Doody (aside from the fact that his name sends Willis into incessant giggles rivaled only when Larry the Cable Guy is on), but I imagine he’s as qualified as Mr. Meis; although that’s not saying much — I’ve met 9-year-olds who are as qualified as Mr. Meis, but they have better interpersonal skills.
And, yeah; I love hippies. I was raised in the 70’s, what can I say?
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 5:57 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ever notice that the folks that profess to be environmentalists use the terms environmentalists and conservationists interchangeably. Conservation is “The wise use of a countries natural resources for the benefit of the greatest number of PEOPLE over the longest period of time.” Most Republicans and conservatives are conservationists.
An environmentalist is a person who believes that PEOPLE have no place in the environment. They can go to the Grand Canyon and be awed by four and one-half billion years of erosion, and stand in wonderment of the beauty carved by nature, but if you show them a four inch hole drilled into the ground by man, you will be witness to a mindless rant that will eventually come to the point, which is to condemn ANY use or idea by mankind involving the physical world that we live on. Theirs’ is an ever changing agenda, and after over ten thousand years of human habitation, on the western slope of CO., their only consensus seems to be that only they can save the world from themselves. As a conservationalist, this environmentalist dilemma suggests to me that their end-game must include mass suicide, probably by nuclear conflagration, waged to make the environment safe from mankind. I’m giving three to one odds, anyone want to bet against me.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 6:38 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Actually, muleshoe raises an excellent point. Conservationists do a huge amount of good, and most hunters, fishermen and outdoorsmen are avid conservationists. Their concern and contribution cannot and should not be undervalued. In a lot of cases, they do the most concrete good for the very species they hunt.
That being said; If all the energy companies did was drill a simple 4-inch hole in the ground, there wouldn’t be a problem. But there’s a lot more that goes into making that little hole, isn’t there?
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 7:04 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Please notice when I say conservationist, you say hunters. When I say four inch hole, not post hole auger. Recognize the symptoms.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 7:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
above post should read When I say 4 inch hole, you say oil company, not post hole auger
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 8:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
A good long conversation/debate could be had about the meanings of “conservationist” and “environmentalist.” It is a good point, that there are some differences but there are also some positive similarities.
I do resent being pigeonholed as someone who apparently “condemn[s] ANY use or idea by mankind involving the physical world that we live on.”
If that were the case I would not be sitting in a house, working on a computer. Instead I’d be living in a bark teepee wiping my ass with leaves (alredy dead of course, wouldn’t want to harm any by picking them).
Webster’s defines environmentalist much better than you muleshoe:
“one concerned about environmental quality especially of the human environment with respect to the control of pollution.”
By the way, this “environmentalist” respects and appreciates “conservationists.” too bad that respect doesn’t seem to be reciprocated.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 9:22 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Wait….”hunters” is suddenly a bad word?? What’s wrong with hunters?
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 8:31 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
What purpose could a debate possibly serve? Environmentalists are not subject to reason. They operate from a mindset. Example: Who was it that first mentioned oil company and hunter? Now ask yourself why? As to respect, you debate, we build. You (environmentalists) never make mistakes, because you don’t do anything but point out other peoples mistakes. You (environmentalists) repeat you mindset mantra like a monotonous languor. You (environmentalists) push your single-minded agenda with the enthusiasm of a Cretan. You (environmentalists) only waver when you sense an opportunity to demonstrate your self perceived intellectual superiority. All the while, the most simplistic point of reason escapes you. I would like to thank you so much for your EPA stamp of approval on toilet paper. It has been a relief to all of us that we could produce this product for your use. R E S P E C T?
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 9:09 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
OK, I get it muleshoe. You have a completely warped idea of what an environmentalist is. What you described is not me but nothing will ever change your mind about that.
Go ahead and shrink back into your little hate-filled shell.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 9:20 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
ECHO!
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 9:36 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
P.S. - Teddy Roosevelt was a conservationist. One of my gun-toting, ATV riding neighbors is too. But I highly doubt you’d see one if you looked in a mirror.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 9:53 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Your choice of words to describe your neighbors says it all. There is that “mindset” thing again.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 10:20 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I was being a little tongue-in-cheek with the “gun-toting, ATV riding” wording but I don’t expect anyone to get that.
Yes most of my neighbors have multiple guns and ride ATVs, snowmobiles, etc, and are general fans of anything that burns gasoline. Sure, they think we’re weird because we choose to rely on pedaling to get us around in the backcountry, and they look at us funny when we use an actual rake instead of a leaf blower … and we think they’re weird because they keep buying motorized toys that run on liquid gold … but we all get along just great.
I don’t look down at them just cause they’re different, and they don’t look down at me for being different either.
More than I can say for people here. Among my friends, being a tree-hugger gets me a little good nature ribbing once in awhile. But on this forum I get pure white-hot hatred for it, and people who claim to know exactly what I believe. THAT is a “mindset” for you.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 10:27 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
“Wierd” is no the word your neighbors use to describe you to us.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 10:28 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
WTH is that supposed to mean? That’s some thin ice you’re on one.voice
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 10:48 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
D U H “Tongue-in-cheek”?
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 10:58 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ah once again I must haul out the dictionary …
“Tongue-in-cheek is a term used to refer to humor in which a statement is not meant to be taken seriously, but its lack of seriousness is subtle. The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “Ironic, slyly humorous; not meant to be taken seriously”.”
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 11:01 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
… and yes, I really DO think you’re that stupid.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 11:08 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
That’s what I said. Duh, tongue-in cheek. You can use it but only you, Right? I actually knew what the term meant. Maybe you should have looked the term up before you used it. Very hateful and one sided.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 11:15 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
That’s the problem with hate. It is very contagious.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 11:32 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bubba,
The assertion by “Tonya” that tongue in cheek is “hate” is really an offensive tool meant to put everyone else on the defensive. It is not, however an intelligent way to debate, or make a logical argument. It instead usually signifies the end of civil conversation, so I will accept it as her declaration of submission.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 11:43 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I have no idea what you’re talking about one.voice … It makes no sense.
But your subtle threat via implying that you know my neighbors, that I got. You’re a creep and a bully. You can take THAT “declaration of submission” and stick it you know where.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 11:50 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Just because someone disagrees with your post, doesn’t mean they hate you personally. You should argue your points and not be so quick to defend your “personal” space. If someone disagrees with the “environmentalist” point of view, and you are one, that doesn’t mean they hate you. To say so only makes you seem petty. If you can’t defend your position, maybe that is reason enough to change it.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 12:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
grandmasix you’re right, disagreeing with someone SHOULDN’T mean hating someone personally, but look at the language in this thread.
These people don’t just “disagree” with what they believe to be the environmentalist point of view. it is apparent they HATE the “environmentalist” … in other words, me.
I admit I went WAY on the defensive, in fact so much that I went into attack mode myself. Why? Because I was actually scared by the vitriol, and especially by one.voice implying that he/she knows my neighbors.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 12:08 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Tonya,
Another assertion trying to put someone on the defensive. Yours is not the only perception in the whole world. Your paranoia is your problem. So far you have (a) proved that you don’t have a sense of humor, (b)that you don’t have points to defend your position and (c) are more hateful than anyone else. How old are you anyway? This is the kind of thing I expect from the fourth graders I try to educate.
As for tongue in cheek, you started it.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 12:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
one.voice, that still makes no sense. You know I am not the one who is full of hate in this conversation.
You are right that I lost my humor may posts ago though. Specifically when you implied knowing my neighbors. You still haven’t answered to that one. If you were just trying to be cute or funny, trust me it was neither. It was very, very creepy.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 12:16 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Tonya,
You’ll have to handle this for a while. Check you later. I have to go back to work trying to “deprogram” your children and open their minds for education.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 12:23 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Nothing to handle here. Good luck with the “deprogramming” or whatever. Talk to ya never.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.