________________________________________
ALSO!
_____________________________________________January 2012.......
The Army HAS ALREADY DONE ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and now plans on pushing the Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB) onto PCMSCOMPLETELY IGNORING FEDERAL COURT ORDERED TRAINING LIMITATIONS- Overtly Pushing their expansion agenda once again.....
The Army did there own
quick "Environmental Assessment" that says the CAB will cause no harm in
any fashion to the region or PCMS....117 Helicopters;20,000 hours of training2,700 more troops needed to support the CAB The Federal Court order directed the Army to keep training levels at or below historical use levels....... Does that sound like 'historical use levels for PCMS' to you?Your comments are needed!!!
PUBLIC COMMENT MEETINGS ARE SLATED FOR 6 to 8 pm Each evening: JANUARY 23RD at TSJC IN TRINIDAD; JANUARY 24TH at OTERO JR COLLEGE IN LA JUNTA; JANUARY 26TH at CROWNE PLAZA IN COLORADO SPRINGS. _________________________________________________________________________________
PCEOC Position Un-changed
De-authorization language needed
For immediate release
Contact: Steve Wooten 719-384-5813
Lon Robertson 719-980-5114
KIM, Colorado
(April 5, 2011)— PCEOC extends our heartfelt thanks to Senators Udall and
Bennett for their efforts on behalf of the citizens in Southeast
Colorado. While the statement of Army Secretary McHugh
is positive in that he states there are no ‘plans’ currently to expand Pinon
Canyon, the PCEOC position on expansion remains that the land acquisition
process needs to be rewound to point zero.
This entails nullification of the DoD waiver that allows for acquisition
of large land parcels and de-authorization of expansion by Congress (“Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary of Defense shall not carry out any construction or
acquisition of real property at Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site, Colorado; all other
provisions of law enabling expansion are hereby nullified.").
Dept. of the Army
statements about their intentions reflects current Army policy. Since 1983 we have learned that Army policies
are subject to change with every change of command. Hence, it is important to reinstitute all
possible government checks and balances regarding PCMS expansion. The process of large land acquisition by the
Dept. of Defense (DoD) involves a number of steps. Some of these include: a waiver to the DoD
moratorium on large land acquisition, authorization by congress, appropriation of
funds by congress, and National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA)
clearance. In the case of Pinon Canyon
Maneuver Site (PCMS) the waiver remains in effect awaiting the next steps and
keeping the cloud of expansion alive.
Until the waiver is
nullified and congress de-authorizes expansion, the “no funding” amendment on
the annual military appropriation legislation is the only check and balance
still in place. The NEPA process may
cause minor modification of expansion plans but it will not stop expansion if
authorization and funding are in place. This
entire struggle is evidence that our representative government can work.
Bureaucracy can be reined-in when citizens build a platform from county
commissioners through state representation and on to the federal level. Unfortunately, Secretary McHugh’s letter is
not the end of the struggle.
We argue, and the
Government Accounting Office agrees, that the DoD waiver was flawed. Specifically, the application for the waiver
stated that the people of Southeast Colorado
favored expansion. The political process
over the last 5 years clearly says otherwise.
Hence, the Dept. of Defense would not set an unwarranted precedent if
they nullified a flawed waiver. Instead,
they would take an important step toward re-building a positive relationship
with the citizens of Southeast Colorado.
A five year hiatus from
expansion does little if anything to relieve the economic stress on the
regions’ agricultural and urban businesses. Banks are still not willing to lend
money for projects on ranches that require 15 to 20 year return on investment,
supporting businesses will see little from ranches purchases for capital
investment and potential purchasers of ranches for sale will find it difficult
to be comforted by only a five year non expansion offer.
The Pinon Canyon
Expansion Opposition Coalition (PCEOC) understands that there is no permanent
solution to the PCMS issue. We also
understand that the impetus for expansion is still in place. That is, El Paso County
is committed to an economy driven by federal input through military
installations. As witnessed by the
rhetoric of community leaders and elected official when announcing the
assignment of a Combat Aviation Brigade to Fort Carson, all the talk was about
what a great economic boom the unit will be and not any comments about how
better trained the troops will be.
However, they lack the land resources for indefinite growth. Hence, the land of Southeast Colorado citizens is
still in play.
We do not feel that
private lands should be nationalized to benefit local economies, our own
economy included. Instead, we see only
two criteria that justify the conversion of private lands to the DoD: First,
all other Department of Defense owned/managed lands are effectively and
efficiently used to train our military, and second the federalization of private
lands is irrefutably proven needed in response to a national crisis and a
resultant immediate military need condition.
The Pinon Canyon
Expansion Opposition Coalition is a broad-based coalition representing
communities across Southern Colorado in their
opposition to the proposed military expansion. PCEOC members include business
owners, teachers, students, elected officials, ranchers, environmentalists and
many others.
The coalition is united in its opposition to any expansion of PCMS. No
funding, no expansion.
# # #
_________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________  January Newsletter is out!
_________________________________________________________________________________
Comment before November 15th, 2010 to have standing on USAF plan to do low level flights over NM and CO with C-130s and CV-22 (Osprey) aircraft. DOWNLOAD COMMENT FORM HERE
_________________________________________________________________________________ Congressman Salazar and Congresswoman Markey: 2011 Funding Ban passes first hurdle.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Pinon Canyon Preservation Festival (Click Here for Press Release)
 Festival was a great success!!!
__________________________________________________________________________________
Regular updates can also be found daily on our Blog or by following us on Twitter!
_________________________________________________________________________________
Pinon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition at odds with ‘Platform for Prosperity’
Pinon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition at odds with ‘Platform for Prosperity’
Scott McInnis’ ‘platform’ is silent on the issue of the private property rights when it comes to expansion of Pinon Canyon
For immediate release
Contact: Lon Robertson 719-980-5114
Steve Wooten 719-384-5813
KIM, Colorado (December 7, 2009)-
The Pinon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition, (PCEOC), once again is disappointed that gubernatorial candidate, Scott McInnis' “Platform for Prosperity” is silent on the issue of private property rights and limited government as they pertain to expanding the Army's Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site. The "Platform" which is being put forward as a statement of unity sweeps under the rug the issue which was most divisive during the campaign between McInnis and Penry.
"How can they come together to patch up their differences?" asks PCEOC president Lon Robertson, "and ignore the major issue that they have completely disagreed on? From our perspective McInnis' and the Republican “Platform for Prosperity”, fails to address a core conservative principle– protecting private enterprise from the heavy hand of government."
“We are hopeful that property-rights Republicans will clarify the position of their party during the caucus process which has been the traditional way of formulating the party platform,” said State Senator Ken Kester (R – Las Animas). "What we have right now is an incomplete Republican Party Platform – ignoring the core of conservatism and the people of Southeastern Colorado," said Kester.
A Booz Allen Hamilton survey commissioned in 2008/2009 by the Army showed that 86% of southeast Coloradans viewed property rights as the most serious problem facing their community. Scott McInnis’ position disregards land and jobs in Southeast Colorado to bring federal subsidy and jobs farther north.
Southeast Colorado Republican Grady Grissom observed “As it stands today I don’t think McInnis could get 25% of the Republican votes in Southeast Colorado, he can’t even find people to work on his campaign down here. He will have to reverse his position on Pinon Canyon to get elected.”
According to the Colorado Office of Economic Development, agriculture is Colorado’s second leading industry. It is also important to consider that the Army’s targeted area in southeastern Colorado alone feeds nearly a million people and the combined losses would cause immeasurable and irreversible harm. Contrary to Mr. McInnis’ recent commitment to ‘do no harm’ he proposes to do just that by supporting a Pinon Canyon expansion.
"Unless McInnis' blatant disregard for the property rights of ranchers who oppose federalizing and removing from agricultural production nearly one fourth of the state, is reversed, I do not see how anyone in agriculture, or for that matter any one that eats, can support him,” said RC Patterson, Southeastern Colorado Rancher and President of RCMR, Inc.
PCEOC president Lon Robertson contends that “one would think that the conservative view would be to recognize property rights, yet the Republican Platform fails miserably toward that end.” “The ‘Willing Seller’ and ‘no eminent domain’ rhetoric won’t get our votes. They [the Army] have tried to coerce sellers with condemnation threats for three years and they have never even had permission from Congress to buy.” “The Army’s position on eminent domain has also flip-flopped at least three times in those same three years. They took 250,000 acres 25 years ago and said they would never come back. We think limited government means a government that stands by its word.” Robertson said.
PCEOC is a non-partisan organization and its opposition to Scott McInnis is based upon his pro-expansion position and is unrelated to his party affiliation.
The coalition is united in its opposition to any expansion of PCMS. No funding, no expansion.
For more information, please see www.pinoncanyon.com.
###
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Please write our senators and ask them to support a permanent ban on the expansion efforts of Pinon Canyon
Here are some sample letters you can download in Word format:
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Lots of things happening that are reminders that this is still a very real issue and while we are gaining ground we MUST push for a permanent ban to completely stop others that are STILL pushing for expansion.
Here are just a few of the recent statements and articles on the Army's desired expansion of Pinon Canyon:
- Judge rules Army EIS of 2007 'capricious and arbitrary'
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Former congressman Scott McInnis in favor of expansion:
Scott McInnis will willingly sacrifice southeastern Colorado to push a more federalized economy and putting more private property in the hands of the federal government. Cases in point:
KHOW interview on specific Pinon Canyon Question
KHOW interview raises more questions about McInnis' fitness for office?
Interview of Scott McInnis by Matthew Roberts
Colorado Statesman 'Innerview' 8-24-09
Sate Senator Josh Penry against expansion:
Josh Penry understands the majority of the PCMS expansion issue. Read and/or listen to his position:
Listen to an interview by Matthew Roberts that explains his perspective here.
Colorado Statesman 'Innerview' September 5, 2009
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Representative Mike Coffman wants to inject partisan politics into an issue that has always had broad bi-partisan support, putting him at odds not only with Coloradans, but also his own party. For years, both Democrats and Republicans have supported our efforts to block overly-aggressive expansion plans by the Army. Most of our elected leaders, like Governor Ritter, know that we can strike the right balance between safeguarding our national security and protecting Southern Colorado's economic vitality.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Representative Salazar continues temporary ban Chieftain article 6-17-09
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Governor Ritter signs HB1317 on June 2, 2009
From Sal Pace's Newsletter:
![]()
Governor Ritter signs Pinon Canyon bill HB1317
Governor Ritter tells chieftain 5-17-2009
Pueblo Chieftain Editorial 5-18-2009
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
100% pure heart - our Legislator Champions have the spirit, the passion, the clear minds and the tenacity that show they are 'all heart'.
Congressman Salazar continues valiant efforts see below
Congresswoman Markey equal to the task see below
HB1317 written to protect the State and southeast Colorado
Colorado Representative Sal Pace staunchly standing for his constituents
Colorado Representative Wes McKinley endless efforts to support agriculture and the constitution
Colorado State Senator Ken Kester example of quiet strength and fortitude on the side of right
Be sure to tell them thank you and please support their supporting us!
_______________________________________________________________________
Representatives Salazar and Markey continue valiant efforts - Letter to Governor asking for signing of HB1317
Fort Polk expansion not related to Pinon Canyon expansion - article in Pueblo Chieftain with interview w/Rep Salazar
_______________________________________________________________________
A number of El Paso County representatives are pushing Mr. Ritter to veto HB1317 - former Congressman Scott McInnis the most noted yesterday. Here is a link to a story on his letter to Mr. Ritter urging veto.
_______________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Article describing their bill can be read HERE
______________________________________________________________________________
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Your Legislators!
Our Representatives and Senators need to continue to hear from us! Let them know you appreciate their support and for standing up for rural America! Ask them to put an end to this black cloud over southeast Colorado and say NO to any expansion of PCMS - forever! Leases are not an answer!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All our Representatives need to continue to hear from us!
We are heartened by the conclusions of two recently published GAO reports, GAO-09-171 and GAO-09-32. The reports bolster our contentions that the Army's expansion proposal is unjustified and the process by which it has pursued its expansion agenda has been fundamentally flawed.
GAO-09-171- indicates that the Army failed to respond to numerous aspects of the congressional mandates and that they failed to provide rationale for selecting the 100,000 acres for the proposed expansion. This is also a significant deviation from the Army's original application for waiver of the moratorium on land acquisitions and another factor that should nullify the expansion efforts.
The military doesn't even have an accurate inventory of all the training lands they already have - so how can they begin to think they can say they need more? They don't even know what they really have.
The DoD needs to place the moratorium back on to land acquisitions and the Army must stop their continued efforts to take our property and our rights. Ask our legislators to demand the DoD to do this now. Click here for contact information for our legislators.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November '08 PCEOC has successful calf sale fundraiser as well as a successful Art Show!
(click on 'Art Show' and see how successful the art show was!)
A special Thanks to everyone who made the success of these two fundraisers possible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ARMY RELEASED THEIR REPORT IN JULY of 08 THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BY CONGRESS. THE REPORT MISSED THE MARK ENTIRELY HOWEVER AND PROVIDES NO ANSWERS AT ALL. FOR THREE YEARS NOW THE DEPT OF DEFENSE HASN’T BEEN ABLE TO JUSTIFY THE EXPANSION OF PINON CANYON. IT HAS BEEN LONG ENOUGH.
and the
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army says it 'would be willing to take ONLY 100,000 acres' even though 'it's not enough'.
Click here for more |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THOSE IN OFFICE SHOULD SUPPORT THEIR CONSITUENTS AND NEED TO BE SOLIDLY AGAINST THE EXPANSION OF PINON CANYON!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep those letters and calls going out to your friends, neighbors, relatives, newspapers and keep writing and calling our legislators - everyone needs to keep reminding them that if they want our vote they have support NO EXPANSION AND NO FUNDING FOR EXPANSION - PERIOD!!
Go to our I CAN HELP page for direct links to our legislators e-mails.
"If I Spend Your Money on Me"
Article by Lynn Allen
03/14/2008 La Junta Tribune Democrat |
Well, it was bound to happen, even the military has learned it needs good PR. So, hundreds of thousands of your hard-earned tax-payer dollars are going to a Pueblo based PR firm. They're supposed to take your money and figure out how to convince you you're happy about them taking your land, or half your town's economy.
I recently heard a politician quote an economist: If I spend your money on me, all I care about is quality. If you spend your money on me, all you care about is cost. If I spend your money on you, I don't care about either. If you spend your money on you, then you can make the decision. He was talking about health care, but it applies here too - the military is spending your money on itself, so they hired the best they could find. I'll give that PR firm one thing, they're good.
I got a call from them on Monday. They wanted my opinions in the form of a poll. Now, I hate polls. They NEVER actually represent my opinions. They represent the best opinion I can give to a carefully worded question issued by a person who is after a certain answer.
For example, "Are you going to vote for Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama?"
"Ummm, how about neither?"
"That's not on my form. Are you going to vote for . . ." and on it goes.
The first question was, "Do you support the expansion of the Pinion Canyon Maneuver Range?"
That was easy. "No."
Instead of the "Why or why not?" I was hoping for, I got, "I need you to answer these questions: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, or Strongly Disagree."
"That's a yes or no question, mister."
"Strongly agree, agree, . ."
"Mister, there's no way I'm going to be able to answer that question with your answers. The answer to 'Do you support the expansion of the Pinion Canyon Maneuver Range?' is 'no'. Now if you want to say: 'You support the expansion of the Pinion Canyon Maneuver Range.', I can say 'Strongly Disagree' loudly. Or you can say, 'You do not support the expansion.' and I can say 'Strongly Agree'. So, what's your question?"
From his tone of voice he knew this was going to be a trying call. But I was able to "Strongly Disagree" with his reworded question.
He asked if I owned land in the takeover zone.
I said, "no", and the argument started again.
He asked "If there was a payment in leu of taxes made to your schools and community, would you support the expansion?"
"No."
He huffed and reworded his question. "What you don't understand," I replied, "is that if you take out my customers, I won't be able to live here, so it won't matter what kind of payments you make, I don't have a business here any more. I like it here, and if you'll leave me alone, I'll support my own community, thank you."
". . . Agree, Disagree . . ."
"STRONGLY DISAGREE."
"If the ranchers were compensated more than the market value of their land, would you support the expansion of Pinion Canyon?"
"No."
There was a furious silence down the line.
"See previous explanation. You can pay them all you want, but when you take out my customers, you kill my farm's value and I walk out of here with the shirt on my back. Since you are getting money out of this deal, how about giving me your address and I'll set my cardboard box up on your lawn. It would be more comfy than under a bridge, and you could tell everyone you're supporting the expansion of Pinion Canyon in a personal way."
He ignored me and went on with, "Do you support private property rights?"
"Absolutely."
"Do you support the expansion if it is done strictly with willing sellers?" He thought he had me there.
"Absolutely not."
He made the mistake of asking "But you said . ."
"You're spending my money to take out my customers. If you were a rancher asking this question, I wouldn't have a problem, but since this is an government entity spending my money, I vote 'Absolutely Not!'"
"Do you support a strong military?"
"Absolutely. I have cousins, neighbors, and nephews in the military, and I'm proud of them for being there."
"How can you not support the expansion of Pinion Canyon if you support the military?" His asked smugly, sure he had caught me in a logical inconsistency.
"24 million acres is enough to train a military of 20 million. Our military isn't nearly that big, and submarines don't work out here so that reduces the number of soldiers per acre even more, so I'd say you have an abundance of land to train on. Use what you already have and quit cannibalizing the people and businesses who pay your wages."
This debate waged for over an hour, and when we were done, he didn't even thank me for my time. But, he firmly understood that there was NOTHING he could do to make me support his cause and he wasn't doing a very good job of trapping me with his questions.
So, for those of you who were caught after my debate with this guy, I'm sorry, he probably reworded his questions to be even trickier. For those of you still on the hit list, don't let them throw you off with their questions. Poll reform starts with us, and since they're fool enough to call, let them know we're not the stupid hicks they think we are. |
| Reprinted by permission of author |
|
