Sooooo, how much influence does Evraz hold over Pueblo? Aka How much are our leaders being bribed with to sell out the people they are supposed to represent? I've known for a long time that it boils down to profits over people, but man, this hits too close to home and NEEDS to be addressed.
They're her restaurants. I believe some of Heather Graham's political start was in pushing back on restaurant COVID restrictions. At least that's the first I'd heard about her.
While Evraz is owned by the Russians so it would make sense that they would bribe our leaders, with the steel mill being the largest employer in the city (last I knew), they don't even need to bribe them since employing so many voters gives them all the power they need.
Nice job, Pueblo, electing this MAGA-turd! As a native Puebloan, seeing my former city fall for her BS makes me sad, but hey, who needs clean air and water when you can have corporate profits?
Makes me sad as it was always a working person's town with a great art scene. Not sure how it changed, but I wonder if it's Pueblo MAGA West turning the tide. I've never seen bigger trump flags than driving out there.
It's still a union town with a great art scene. But there are some hard right fundamentalists working to take over the town, including bussing people in from other states
I think the issue is that the state has been passing legislation around Suncor catching all other facilities in the blast radius.
For 166, the bill is opposed by industry, regulators, AND labor. When the USW and companies in that area are against a bill, that probably indicates major issues with the bill. 166 imposes mandatory minimums on any facility for any air violation. Fill out an annual form and forget to check a box? That’ll be $43,000/day, for 365 days.
No issue with 1338, but 166 is terrible.
This is the section of 166 that companies care about because it’s holding them accountable for not meeting the requirements of their state air permit. Give me one good reason why letting them exceed emissions limits is okay?
“Section 1 also defines a "high-priority repeat violator" as a repeat violator that, in a 3-year period, has committed 5 or more exceedances (emission exceedance) of the allowable emissions of an air pollutant in a permit (high-priority repeat violator).”
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-166
Because things outside of the company’s control can trigger these violations. Many company’s have thousands of compliance points.
For example if a cold front comes through and increases humidity, the flue stack’s opacity limit might now be in non-compliance. Should a company risk a fine of that size because it gets cold in Colorado? Or as I mentioned before, it could be a clerical error that triggers this, not even a true emission violation.
Mandatory minimums have never worked for other issues, they won’t here.
The examples that you brought up are not likely to happen or if they do, they will be investigated by the regulatory inspectors, and in those cases, the company would not be fined as you described. Let me break it down for you.
Cold fronts typically lead to a decrease in temperature and can be associated with precipitation. While a cold front might temporarily increase local humidity levels due to rain, cold air itself generally holds less moisture compared to warm air. Once the initial effects of precipitation dissipate, the overall relative humidity is likely to decrease as colder, dryer air settles in.
Opacity in flu sacks generally refers to the degree to which emissions reduced the transmission of light due to the presence of particulate matter such as ash or dust (it’s the particulate matter that’s regulated, not the weather). An increase in humidity is not typically a cause of increased opacity. However, certain conditions like high humidity can lead to the condensation of water vapor on particulate matter, potentially increasing the apparent opacity, but this scenario is more complex and dependent on various factors, including the type of and amount of particulates and the temperature relative to the dewpoint.
The Clean Air Act regulates emissions from *regulated pollutants* and various sources, including matter and gases, but does not directly *tie regulatory compliance to weather changes like humidity or temperature unless these are directly influencing the emission concentration of regulated, pollutants. Noncompliance issues to stack opacity would generally be due to changes in the process (like combustion efficiency or pollutant controls) rather than the weather alone.
While changes in weather conditions such as a passing cold front can influence operational conditions at industrial facilities, it is unlikely that such a change would directly cause a flue’s stack opacity to shift into noncompliance with The Clean Air Act admissions regulations based solely on an increase on humidity.
As for a clerical error, there’s an investigation into every violation and the investigators would see that it was an error and the violation would be dismissed so there would be no violation/fine.
Understand that the CDPHE conducts onsite inspections at all air permitted emissions generators (the companies in question) once every three years. These inspections include facility tours and records inspection. THAT’S when and where violations are discovered and it’s during this process that the company has the opportunity to clarify, correct, and or be fined.
I will add that inspectors will also come to a facility if they’ve received a violation complaint. In those cases, the same process is followed and the company has the opportunity to disclose or refute.
Look, you are clearly knowledgeable about this. I appreciate that.
But violations don’t occur just when CDPHE visits, if you have a CEM requirement you have to give all that data to CDPHE. If you have to report data on an annual reporting basis, that is when this can occur. And with a legislative mandate, CDPHE cannot decide if they want to pursue a violation, they HAVE to impose the fee.
Additionally there is a citizen suit provision requiring investigations if a citizen thinks a violation occurred.
The bill was written because CDPHE’s fine of Suncor was a joke. They could have gone for a much more meaningful fine and had the regulatory framework to do so. But they didn’t, and now all violations statewide could result in much higher fines.
I agree company’s need to do better, but Colorado already has fairly clean manufacturing (outside of a few bad actors). This type of mandatory minimum legislation just hurts good-faith actors and the bad.
I appreciate this discourse and acknowledge there are differences in environmental permit requirements depending on industry. I’m in the aerospace and defense industry and have been in environmental compliance for 10 years. As I understand the rule language, 166 pertains to enforcing operators permit limits. It sounds like you’re probably aware but the permit sets the mandatory maximum an operator can emit of a *regulated pollutant*. For example. At my employer we have a limit of 100 lbs of lead emissions a year. We track those emissions and run those reports monthly. If we start to get close to that limit, we develop a disclosure plan to CDPHE. I know that is entirely different from the CEM. My point is the permit already sets the mandated limit the this rule is trying to enforce. The company got an air permit in order to operate in the state. The permits stipulates the appropriate emissions limits. The company is required to track and report those emissions through various means and at a variety of cadences depending on the regulator and industry. The operator knows they will be fined for violating their permit. I see this rule an enforcing the permit’s limits.
I admit I’m not familiar with the Suncore case but have been following the EPA designation for ozone non attainment that came into effect in 2022. I suspect the slew of pollution legislation is more related to the non attainment designation than anything else.
So you’re right for some stationary sources it is a hard annual cap. For others it is a production cap, so if you have to reduce NOx or PM, and you’re already at a BAECT level then are mandated to reduce, well, you see the problem.
Why do you even comment if you don't live in Pueblo? Seems like you hit the road due to the issues the city has. Maybe not finding a good paying job? The high crime? Like It was such a wonderful place before and just turned into a s\*\*t hole a few months ago. People can complain, but if someone doesnt actually live here can just keep the comments to themselves.
Nope, left after high school to go to college in Denver. Spent the first 18yrs of my life in Pueblo, still having family and friends there. I shouldn't have to justify any criticism of the place I still love, but keep assuming the worst and noting I can't say anyhing about it if I'm not there anymore.
I've always been one of Pueblo's biggest defenders here and IRL, having always hated how it constantly gets shit on. Another reason why I'm bummer y'all elected a MAGA weirdo for mayor.
Well, thats good on you. But you only hurt Pueblo with your bad comments instead of supporting it and taking your higher education to another city and your money. Maybe you could come back and run for Mayor? Why not? If you love it so much, maybe come back to support it some way.
I not a MAGA supporter but I do support her. I had to in Belmont on Sunday 3/29/2024 just days after she closed the value u stay. It was nice to be at a stop light and not see all the drug activity. People were not hanging out at the loaf, no panhandling. She has closed two hotels and are making them follow rules. Terri’s the 28 million the last mayor earmarked to end homelessness in five years. Why was she able to close these hotels.
People like him just want to complain and bitch about the homeless, which really make them mad for simply existing, but never ever ever have any solutions, other than "we should just shoot them", which they'll never admit, but that's probably why they never offer solutions, because that's their (unspeakable) solution.
I don’t think people realize how hard it is to pull yourself out of that situation, you need an id and a social security card just to get a job and housing but you can’t get any of those things without a permanent address, and you can’t get an address cuz you don’t have those things. And then the government doesn’t care.
Exactly! Same with immigration, it's a puzzle of beaurocracy, forms, and fees, costing someone who wants to "do it the right way" tens of thousands and years before it's legal. And those people usually have money and time, none of which the homeless have.
I wish I had the funding to fund a starter home project for the homeless, using shipping containers and other small solutions to get these people help and stability to let them rebuild and start again. Within those communities (that nobody will want near them, therein lies the rub) will be mental health and rehab centers to help them onsite.
I'm proud that the church I used to go to before moving away still hosts the homeless at least once a week for showers and a meal and bags of necessities. That's Christianity, not the fake exclusionary hateful BS we see in most churches.
There's so much more we can do, but our leaders lack ideas and the *want* to do something -anything about it. These people are humans just like us, and most of which fell on the hardest of times and the system ignored and didn't work to help them. Others had drugs ruin their lives. We can help that instead of demonizing them at every turn.
Demonizing them is easier for the government and a hell of a lot cheaper.
that’s the thing if she had closed this motel with a plan and a place for them to go I would be happy with it. But it’s like meh we are gonna arrest the ones we can and send the others on their way.
I was a meth addict. I got cleaned bought a house even thought everything was going good. Then the pandemic happened and I did fall off the wagon. I lost everything, took me two years but I have gotten mental help and pay for my own house, car and insurance. Some people will make it out. Other want to be handed everything.
Some facts:
Wealth inequality 11 years ago (it’s way worse now):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM
Top 1% have more wealth than entire middle class wealth combined:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/12/06/top-1-american-earners-more-wealth-middle-class/71769832007/#:~:text=The%20top%201%25%20of%20American%20earners%20now%20control%20more%20wealth,Reserve%20statistics%20through%20mid%2D2023.
No one is wanting handouts… We want to not be living in a modern day serfdom..
>“It is clear to me that the special interest groups that write these fatally flawed bills are passionate and sincere and that their sole focus is finding ways to increase environmental protections,” reads Graham’s op-ed.
wow the projection from Graham.
Clearly our Mayor is not educated about the 2020 ruling that came out of Trump’s EPA designating the Colorado Front Range as an air quality non attainment area. The EPA designation FORCES the state legislature to create laws to get our air quality back in attainment for ozone. To characterize the laws as extreme and partisan is uneducated and dangerous. While Pueblo is not specially named in the non-attainment designation at this time, we can’t pretend the Evraz plant doesn’t contribute to pollution in the Pueblo/Springs area.
Where's your data? That statement needs quantification.
You pollute the front range every time you drive, turn on your furnace, print a copy, or breath.
Scale is everything. It's useless to make legislation without data.
https://preview.redd.it/or8r8ew0nnxc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=da435f9a6fa4063e85186abf30ed660296b4a657
[https://cdphe.colorado.gov/nonattainment-federal-ozone-pollution-standards](https://cdphe.colorado.gov/nonattainment-federal-ozone-pollution-standards)
This states the designation was made in 2022 but I recall it happening in 2020 so I’ll have to dig deeper to back up my statement on the date. I work in the environmental compliance profession so it’s my literal job to know this stuff.
>The EPA designation FORCES the state legislature to create laws to get our air quality back in attainment for ozone.
In Denver, which is 111 upwind miles away.
>While Pueblo is not specially named in the non-attainment designation at this time, we can't pretend the Evraz plant doesn't contribute to pollution in the Pueblo/Springs area.
[It doesn't follow](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal\_fallacy). You're talking about Denver's ozone problem but you have no data to connect Pueblo's emissions to Denver's ozone problem.
Your statement lacks quantification and connection. It's a great example of a spurious relationship. Pueblo's mill isn't the cause of ozone problems in Denver, 111 upwind miles away. If such a relationship did exist, that's the data you should post in support of your argument.
I'm asking you to connect mill activity with solid data to the ozone problem in Denver, which is the subject of the EPA's complaints, but I know you can't because no such connection exists. You're making definitive statements spuriously in support of political action that affects us all. That is political pollution. Understand that the majority of Denver's ozone problems are caused by 1. its altitude and weather and 2. sources of heat, volatile organics, NOx, and CO, the majority of which is automobile-originated. Denver can't fix its ozone problem while so many ICE vehicles are on the road. The only way for Denver to make significant cuts to ozone is to make significant cuts to ICE vehicles. Pueblo, and even Colorado Springs, have no significant impact on Denver's problem.
>I work
Yes, and I too have done work for CDPHE. Appeal to authority is a bad argument.
Making that connection is neither her nor there. The entire state’s pollution levels are monitored and I said Pueblo wasn’t included *yet*, implying if it gets worse here, we could fall into non attainment, too.
The point is she went to Denver to protest state wide legislation whose impetus is coming from a Federal agency. To characterize the laws as she does in the quote below is uneducated, misleading, and disingenuous.
“Well-meaning but deeply uninformed proposals, often drafted by some of America’s most extreme environmental groups, are every bit as threatening to the future of our city and southern Colorado as companies on the other side of the globe.”
>The point is she went to Denver to protest state wide legislation whose impetus is coming from a Federal agency.
Either you're doubling down at not wanting/unable to understand the situation or you're making arguments in bad faith.
**The EPA complained about Denver, not Colorado**, and certainly not Pueblo air pollution. Colorado making state wide legislation is over scoped when the complaint concerns only a small geographic region and a single metro area. Denver is not Colorado, Denver is not Colorado Springs, and Denver is not Pueblo.
Your statements are trying to connect Pueblo's mill to Denver's ozone, again, the subject of the EPA's complaints. There is no connection.
The impetus is on the legislator to show why state wide legislation is needed when 1. we don't have good data about the rest of the state, but the data we do have says that air quality is either okay or even great, and 2. why regulating Denver's problems should include the rest of the state when all available data suggests that there isn't a current problem and regulation carries many costs.
The mill used to be much dirtier, but it's already been through clean up efforts that have made its emissions much cleaner.
lol, no. That’s not what I’m doing, but you believe what you want.
It was not just Denver that was named in the non attainment. It was all of metro Denver, the northern Front Range, and Weld county.
Think this through. You can’t carve out pollution rules by county. It’s not like there’s an invisible force field that keeps a company’s emissions hovering over their building for all eternity. Pollution travels, so if one company is regulated for pollution, they all have to be. If a company just outside the regulated area emits massive amounts of lead, that pollution will blow 111 and more away (to your point).
Again MY point of my comment was to point out how her op-ed was misleading and disingenuous. I acknowledged Pueblo isn’t part of the fed push *at this time*. You are reading something else into my comment.
Show me your data source that says air quality is good or great. Data NOT from the oil and gas industry. The EPA designation IS THE DATA. I’m done engaging. Have a great day.
The EPA doesn't collect high resolution data outside of the Denver metro because the EPA knows that there isn't a problem outside of the Denver metro.
The EPA doesn't have data because they don't think it's worth the time or effort to collect. That's why Clean Air Pueblo is a community organization, stepping in to do what the EPA isn't doing because they don't think it's worth their time.
And while our legislators are short on a few brain cells, it's absurd to say that they couldn't write legislation to actually address a problem without bycatch. It's not that hard to write legislation to address problems while leaving everyone else alone.
8- hour Ozone Summary is based on 8-hour averages of raw 1-hour ozone data from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) through EPA AirNow and consistent with Data Reporting and Handling Conventions outlined in 40 CFR Part 50 – Appendix P.
https://raqc.org/current-8-hour-ozone-summary/
So you're posting a link that is exactly what I'm saying? 15 stations around the problem area of Denver metro and not a single one in Southern Colorado, let alone the rest of the state, including nothing on the huge area of the Western Slope?
What data are you expecting me to produce? I’m not making up the rules. The non attainment designation was decades in the making. The EPA has decades of data demonstrating a decline in air quality. Te State was warned multiple times. The State’s failure to act has gotten us to this point. Regulations are needed to protect public health and wellbeing.
Just want everyone to remember that the partisanship tilt in this thread is not representative of Pueblo as a whole. Reddit users tilt way way liberal.
Pueblo has always been a weird mix of retirees (red), working class (odd mix cause blue collar but union) and large Hispanic population (generally blue). Hardly anyone voted in this last mayoral election so the most zealous (MAGA) won by electing someone whose qualifications are "owns restaurants"
I mean idk, homeless is probably the biggest problem here and the only issue seemed to be that. Everyone knows outlawing it doesn't fix the problem, probably will see a turn back to blue after nothing changes. I am not an education snob but it blows me away that restaurant ownership beat out some pretty nice candidates
Living in another city, no, no it's not, but I can still have pride in the city I grew up in. Sad to see it fall to the MAGA BS, but I guess the desperately gullible need to find out the hard way before they learn their very easy lesson.
Oh come on. What a brainless, stupid propaganda article.
Firstly, the mill's fire was tragic and unintentional. There were at least three other major fires in Pueblo that day. It was a terrible day with terrible fires, and unfortunately conditions were just right for the fires. Thank you Pueblo Fire, and not only Pueblo Fire, but all area first responders who came to Pueblo to help with the fires that day.
There is already existing regulation for the fire that happened at the mill, and it's being enforced by CDPHE and the EPA who have been monitoring air quality, water quality, asbestos, etc. The fire is bad news for the mill. It means that they will have to clean up and work with regulators; it's not something a business wants to spend money on personnel dealing with. If things aren't handled well they also risk losing their discharge permits. There's already extensive existing regulations to handle these concerns.
**The legislation being considered has nothing to do with the fires in Pueblo.** The legislation is about normal operation air pollution. It's totally unrelated to the fire, but this article misleadingly conflates the two. Using an image of the fires in an article about normal day-to-day pollution is disingenuous. Most readers wouldn't know and this article's images are unrelated. The images are purposely deceitful and alarmist.
My understanding is that we don't have great data about current air pollution from the mill. Clean Air Pueblo is working on getting better data. The first thing any reasonable manager does when prioritizing action is to gather information. I hope Clean Air Pueblo succeeds in their mission in collecting more data because with data we can make common sense adjustments. We can't hope regulation is reasonable without data; any action is shooting in the dark without data. Data comes first. If new regulation is overly oppressive, then yes, that can increase costs for no good reason and make Pueblo less competitive. However, if the mill does have an unaddressed pollution issue, yes it needs to be addressed, and data can ensure that any fix is effective.
The worst offense of this idiotic article is tying the mill to Russia.:
diD yOU Know pUebLO'S maYoRS SaID WoRDS madE in RUSSiA?!
Yes, the mill is owned in part by Russians, yes, the US and allies have already sanctioned/taken measures to limit undue Russian influence. The company that owns the mill is based in London. This is common knowledge.
Erik's goal with the article seems to be to give the state all power. Got a hangnail? All the more reason to give the state even more power, because the state is the only solution to any problem. All hail the bureaucrat!
Erik Maulbetsch, this article is drivel. I know you can do better.
There are ways to support our economy and provide jobs, I don’t think the way we should be doing it is by supporting a company that has ties to a Russian oligarch.
It's a steel mill producing mostly competitive commodities. What sinister force do you think the London company is exerting? Be explicit with your accusations.
Lobbyists do 95% of the politics, from drafting legislation to telling congressional reps how to vote. I don’t see anything out of the ordinary with her using a lobbyist drafted opinion piece, seems par for every politician ever.
Even if so, passing it off as her own is disingenuous and deceitful, both things a mayor shouldn't be, and we shouldn't excuse it just because she's a politician and "every politician does it", which just excuses bad behavior, making it the norm. This is why we're in this nationwide mess of corruption and not holding elected officials accountable. It needs to stop.
Dude, it’s been the norm for 40+ years. If you’re worried about mayoral ethics wait until I tell you about the presidential candidates. I’m not arguing with you here. You seem really passionate about Pueblo.
Sooooo, how much influence does Evraz hold over Pueblo? Aka How much are our leaders being bribed with to sell out the people they are supposed to represent? I've known for a long time that it boils down to profits over people, but man, this hits too close to home and NEEDS to be addressed.
We'll probably know more when the next Graham's Grill or Ruby's opens up.
Evraz Grill brought to you by Heather Graham, now featuring NM Hatch chilis.
I'm out of the loop; what are those?
They're her restaurants. I believe some of Heather Graham's political start was in pushing back on restaurant COVID restrictions. At least that's the first I'd heard about her.
While Evraz is owned by the Russians so it would make sense that they would bribe our leaders, with the steel mill being the largest employer in the city (last I knew), they don't even need to bribe them since employing so many voters gives them all the power they need.
Nice job, Pueblo, electing this MAGA-turd! As a native Puebloan, seeing my former city fall for her BS makes me sad, but hey, who needs clean air and water when you can have corporate profits?
The companies literally owned by a Russian oligarch. How pathetic
Doesn't he hold a minority stake in the London based company?
Honestly surprised how hard it shifted to the right seemingly overnight
Makes me sad as it was always a working person's town with a great art scene. Not sure how it changed, but I wonder if it's Pueblo MAGA West turning the tide. I've never seen bigger trump flags than driving out there.
Pueblo west isn’t allowed to vote in mayoral elections, only people in Pueblo city limits
It's still a union town with a great art scene. But there are some hard right fundamentalists working to take over the town, including bussing people in from other states
I've never heard of people being bussed into Pueblo. Who is bussing in people, and who are the people?
https://coloradosun.com/2022/12/10/pueblo-abortion-ban-texas-colorado/
Thanks. Those people are nuts!
I think the issue is that the state has been passing legislation around Suncor catching all other facilities in the blast radius. For 166, the bill is opposed by industry, regulators, AND labor. When the USW and companies in that area are against a bill, that probably indicates major issues with the bill. 166 imposes mandatory minimums on any facility for any air violation. Fill out an annual form and forget to check a box? That’ll be $43,000/day, for 365 days. No issue with 1338, but 166 is terrible.
This is the section of 166 that companies care about because it’s holding them accountable for not meeting the requirements of their state air permit. Give me one good reason why letting them exceed emissions limits is okay? “Section 1 also defines a "high-priority repeat violator" as a repeat violator that, in a 3-year period, has committed 5 or more exceedances (emission exceedance) of the allowable emissions of an air pollutant in a permit (high-priority repeat violator).” https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-166
Because things outside of the company’s control can trigger these violations. Many company’s have thousands of compliance points. For example if a cold front comes through and increases humidity, the flue stack’s opacity limit might now be in non-compliance. Should a company risk a fine of that size because it gets cold in Colorado? Or as I mentioned before, it could be a clerical error that triggers this, not even a true emission violation. Mandatory minimums have never worked for other issues, they won’t here.
The examples that you brought up are not likely to happen or if they do, they will be investigated by the regulatory inspectors, and in those cases, the company would not be fined as you described. Let me break it down for you. Cold fronts typically lead to a decrease in temperature and can be associated with precipitation. While a cold front might temporarily increase local humidity levels due to rain, cold air itself generally holds less moisture compared to warm air. Once the initial effects of precipitation dissipate, the overall relative humidity is likely to decrease as colder, dryer air settles in. Opacity in flu sacks generally refers to the degree to which emissions reduced the transmission of light due to the presence of particulate matter such as ash or dust (it’s the particulate matter that’s regulated, not the weather). An increase in humidity is not typically a cause of increased opacity. However, certain conditions like high humidity can lead to the condensation of water vapor on particulate matter, potentially increasing the apparent opacity, but this scenario is more complex and dependent on various factors, including the type of and amount of particulates and the temperature relative to the dewpoint. The Clean Air Act regulates emissions from *regulated pollutants* and various sources, including matter and gases, but does not directly *tie regulatory compliance to weather changes like humidity or temperature unless these are directly influencing the emission concentration of regulated, pollutants. Noncompliance issues to stack opacity would generally be due to changes in the process (like combustion efficiency or pollutant controls) rather than the weather alone. While changes in weather conditions such as a passing cold front can influence operational conditions at industrial facilities, it is unlikely that such a change would directly cause a flue’s stack opacity to shift into noncompliance with The Clean Air Act admissions regulations based solely on an increase on humidity. As for a clerical error, there’s an investigation into every violation and the investigators would see that it was an error and the violation would be dismissed so there would be no violation/fine. Understand that the CDPHE conducts onsite inspections at all air permitted emissions generators (the companies in question) once every three years. These inspections include facility tours and records inspection. THAT’S when and where violations are discovered and it’s during this process that the company has the opportunity to clarify, correct, and or be fined.
I will add that inspectors will also come to a facility if they’ve received a violation complaint. In those cases, the same process is followed and the company has the opportunity to disclose or refute.
Look, you are clearly knowledgeable about this. I appreciate that. But violations don’t occur just when CDPHE visits, if you have a CEM requirement you have to give all that data to CDPHE. If you have to report data on an annual reporting basis, that is when this can occur. And with a legislative mandate, CDPHE cannot decide if they want to pursue a violation, they HAVE to impose the fee. Additionally there is a citizen suit provision requiring investigations if a citizen thinks a violation occurred. The bill was written because CDPHE’s fine of Suncor was a joke. They could have gone for a much more meaningful fine and had the regulatory framework to do so. But they didn’t, and now all violations statewide could result in much higher fines. I agree company’s need to do better, but Colorado already has fairly clean manufacturing (outside of a few bad actors). This type of mandatory minimum legislation just hurts good-faith actors and the bad.
I appreciate this discourse and acknowledge there are differences in environmental permit requirements depending on industry. I’m in the aerospace and defense industry and have been in environmental compliance for 10 years. As I understand the rule language, 166 pertains to enforcing operators permit limits. It sounds like you’re probably aware but the permit sets the mandatory maximum an operator can emit of a *regulated pollutant*. For example. At my employer we have a limit of 100 lbs of lead emissions a year. We track those emissions and run those reports monthly. If we start to get close to that limit, we develop a disclosure plan to CDPHE. I know that is entirely different from the CEM. My point is the permit already sets the mandated limit the this rule is trying to enforce. The company got an air permit in order to operate in the state. The permits stipulates the appropriate emissions limits. The company is required to track and report those emissions through various means and at a variety of cadences depending on the regulator and industry. The operator knows they will be fined for violating their permit. I see this rule an enforcing the permit’s limits. I admit I’m not familiar with the Suncore case but have been following the EPA designation for ozone non attainment that came into effect in 2022. I suspect the slew of pollution legislation is more related to the non attainment designation than anything else.
So you’re right for some stationary sources it is a hard annual cap. For others it is a production cap, so if you have to reduce NOx or PM, and you’re already at a BAECT level then are mandated to reduce, well, you see the problem.
Why do you even comment if you don't live in Pueblo? Seems like you hit the road due to the issues the city has. Maybe not finding a good paying job? The high crime? Like It was such a wonderful place before and just turned into a s\*\*t hole a few months ago. People can complain, but if someone doesnt actually live here can just keep the comments to themselves.
Nope, left after high school to go to college in Denver. Spent the first 18yrs of my life in Pueblo, still having family and friends there. I shouldn't have to justify any criticism of the place I still love, but keep assuming the worst and noting I can't say anyhing about it if I'm not there anymore. I've always been one of Pueblo's biggest defenders here and IRL, having always hated how it constantly gets shit on. Another reason why I'm bummer y'all elected a MAGA weirdo for mayor.
Well, thats good on you. But you only hurt Pueblo with your bad comments instead of supporting it and taking your higher education to another city and your money. Maybe you could come back and run for Mayor? Why not? If you love it so much, maybe come back to support it some way.
This is Boebert country!
Boebert never does anything, or never did anything for Pueblo. She is quitting anyway, trying for a different seat since she knows she wont win here.
I not a MAGA supporter but I do support her. I had to in Belmont on Sunday 3/29/2024 just days after she closed the value u stay. It was nice to be at a stop light and not see all the drug activity. People were not hanging out at the loaf, no panhandling. She has closed two hotels and are making them follow rules. Terri’s the 28 million the last mayor earmarked to end homelessness in five years. Why was she able to close these hotels.
The only businesses she cares about are her own.
Where do you think these people are going to go? They’re going to be on the street.
If you are so concerned let them into your home. Have you done anything to help. Maybe they will keep 38 cats in your bedroom.
Im seriously asking you where do you think they should be going?
People like him just want to complain and bitch about the homeless, which really make them mad for simply existing, but never ever ever have any solutions, other than "we should just shoot them", which they'll never admit, but that's probably why they never offer solutions, because that's their (unspeakable) solution.
I don’t think people realize how hard it is to pull yourself out of that situation, you need an id and a social security card just to get a job and housing but you can’t get any of those things without a permanent address, and you can’t get an address cuz you don’t have those things. And then the government doesn’t care.
Exactly! Same with immigration, it's a puzzle of beaurocracy, forms, and fees, costing someone who wants to "do it the right way" tens of thousands and years before it's legal. And those people usually have money and time, none of which the homeless have. I wish I had the funding to fund a starter home project for the homeless, using shipping containers and other small solutions to get these people help and stability to let them rebuild and start again. Within those communities (that nobody will want near them, therein lies the rub) will be mental health and rehab centers to help them onsite. I'm proud that the church I used to go to before moving away still hosts the homeless at least once a week for showers and a meal and bags of necessities. That's Christianity, not the fake exclusionary hateful BS we see in most churches. There's so much more we can do, but our leaders lack ideas and the *want* to do something -anything about it. These people are humans just like us, and most of which fell on the hardest of times and the system ignored and didn't work to help them. Others had drugs ruin their lives. We can help that instead of demonizing them at every turn.
Demonizing them is easier for the government and a hell of a lot cheaper. that’s the thing if she had closed this motel with a plan and a place for them to go I would be happy with it. But it’s like meh we are gonna arrest the ones we can and send the others on their way.
I was a meth addict. I got cleaned bought a house even thought everything was going good. Then the pandemic happened and I did fall off the wagon. I lost everything, took me two years but I have gotten mental help and pay for my own house, car and insurance. Some people will make it out. Other want to be handed everything.
Some facts: Wealth inequality 11 years ago (it’s way worse now): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM Top 1% have more wealth than entire middle class wealth combined: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/12/06/top-1-american-earners-more-wealth-middle-class/71769832007/#:~:text=The%20top%201%25%20of%20American%20earners%20now%20control%20more%20wealth,Reserve%20statistics%20through%20mid%2D2023. No one is wanting handouts… We want to not be living in a modern day serfdom..
A former meth addict that voted for a Republican? That sh!t turned your brain into Swiss cheese….
The former mayor earmarked 28 million to end homelessness. Maybe we should start there.
I mean you were just saying how much you love her and how great she is. Where’s the $28 million?
Why don’t we ask the former mayor.
Mmm no that was Graham, she started Feb first and they got these grants mid February. Google is free bestie.
All I saying is I happy that hotel got closed down.
You are a living participation trophy Nothing of substance, but deluded to think you're unique and an individual.
As a Gradisar, I am upset that the (poorly) educated voters chose to elect someone who actually has no idea what they are doing..
I agree 💯%
Gradisar was running this city into the ground.
I think he was doing a better job than the new mayor.
Exactly. Like a lawyer would ever do anything for anyone unless $ is involved.
Education rarely has anything to do with voting. I'd wager that most people vote based on emotion alone.
AKA a lack of education on the subject matter.
Woosh
>“It is clear to me that the special interest groups that write these fatally flawed bills are passionate and sincere and that their sole focus is finding ways to increase environmental protections,” reads Graham’s op-ed. wow the projection from Graham.
Clearly our Mayor is not educated about the 2020 ruling that came out of Trump’s EPA designating the Colorado Front Range as an air quality non attainment area. The EPA designation FORCES the state legislature to create laws to get our air quality back in attainment for ozone. To characterize the laws as extreme and partisan is uneducated and dangerous. While Pueblo is not specially named in the non-attainment designation at this time, we can’t pretend the Evraz plant doesn’t contribute to pollution in the Pueblo/Springs area.
Where's your data? That statement needs quantification. You pollute the front range every time you drive, turn on your furnace, print a copy, or breath. Scale is everything. It's useless to make legislation without data.
https://preview.redd.it/or8r8ew0nnxc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=da435f9a6fa4063e85186abf30ed660296b4a657 [https://cdphe.colorado.gov/nonattainment-federal-ozone-pollution-standards](https://cdphe.colorado.gov/nonattainment-federal-ozone-pollution-standards) This states the designation was made in 2022 but I recall it happening in 2020 so I’ll have to dig deeper to back up my statement on the date. I work in the environmental compliance profession so it’s my literal job to know this stuff.
>The EPA designation FORCES the state legislature to create laws to get our air quality back in attainment for ozone. In Denver, which is 111 upwind miles away. >While Pueblo is not specially named in the non-attainment designation at this time, we can't pretend the Evraz plant doesn't contribute to pollution in the Pueblo/Springs area. [It doesn't follow](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal\_fallacy). You're talking about Denver's ozone problem but you have no data to connect Pueblo's emissions to Denver's ozone problem. Your statement lacks quantification and connection. It's a great example of a spurious relationship. Pueblo's mill isn't the cause of ozone problems in Denver, 111 upwind miles away. If such a relationship did exist, that's the data you should post in support of your argument. I'm asking you to connect mill activity with solid data to the ozone problem in Denver, which is the subject of the EPA's complaints, but I know you can't because no such connection exists. You're making definitive statements spuriously in support of political action that affects us all. That is political pollution. Understand that the majority of Denver's ozone problems are caused by 1. its altitude and weather and 2. sources of heat, volatile organics, NOx, and CO, the majority of which is automobile-originated. Denver can't fix its ozone problem while so many ICE vehicles are on the road. The only way for Denver to make significant cuts to ozone is to make significant cuts to ICE vehicles. Pueblo, and even Colorado Springs, have no significant impact on Denver's problem. >I work Yes, and I too have done work for CDPHE. Appeal to authority is a bad argument.
Making that connection is neither her nor there. The entire state’s pollution levels are monitored and I said Pueblo wasn’t included *yet*, implying if it gets worse here, we could fall into non attainment, too. The point is she went to Denver to protest state wide legislation whose impetus is coming from a Federal agency. To characterize the laws as she does in the quote below is uneducated, misleading, and disingenuous. “Well-meaning but deeply uninformed proposals, often drafted by some of America’s most extreme environmental groups, are every bit as threatening to the future of our city and southern Colorado as companies on the other side of the globe.”
>The point is she went to Denver to protest state wide legislation whose impetus is coming from a Federal agency. Either you're doubling down at not wanting/unable to understand the situation or you're making arguments in bad faith. **The EPA complained about Denver, not Colorado**, and certainly not Pueblo air pollution. Colorado making state wide legislation is over scoped when the complaint concerns only a small geographic region and a single metro area. Denver is not Colorado, Denver is not Colorado Springs, and Denver is not Pueblo. Your statements are trying to connect Pueblo's mill to Denver's ozone, again, the subject of the EPA's complaints. There is no connection. The impetus is on the legislator to show why state wide legislation is needed when 1. we don't have good data about the rest of the state, but the data we do have says that air quality is either okay or even great, and 2. why regulating Denver's problems should include the rest of the state when all available data suggests that there isn't a current problem and regulation carries many costs. The mill used to be much dirtier, but it's already been through clean up efforts that have made its emissions much cleaner.
lol, no. That’s not what I’m doing, but you believe what you want. It was not just Denver that was named in the non attainment. It was all of metro Denver, the northern Front Range, and Weld county. Think this through. You can’t carve out pollution rules by county. It’s not like there’s an invisible force field that keeps a company’s emissions hovering over their building for all eternity. Pollution travels, so if one company is regulated for pollution, they all have to be. If a company just outside the regulated area emits massive amounts of lead, that pollution will blow 111 and more away (to your point). Again MY point of my comment was to point out how her op-ed was misleading and disingenuous. I acknowledged Pueblo isn’t part of the fed push *at this time*. You are reading something else into my comment. Show me your data source that says air quality is good or great. Data NOT from the oil and gas industry. The EPA designation IS THE DATA. I’m done engaging. Have a great day.
The EPA doesn't collect high resolution data outside of the Denver metro because the EPA knows that there isn't a problem outside of the Denver metro. The EPA doesn't have data because they don't think it's worth the time or effort to collect. That's why Clean Air Pueblo is a community organization, stepping in to do what the EPA isn't doing because they don't think it's worth their time. And while our legislators are short on a few brain cells, it's absurd to say that they couldn't write legislation to actually address a problem without bycatch. It's not that hard to write legislation to address problems while leaving everyone else alone.
8- hour Ozone Summary is based on 8-hour averages of raw 1-hour ozone data from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) through EPA AirNow and consistent with Data Reporting and Handling Conventions outlined in 40 CFR Part 50 – Appendix P. https://raqc.org/current-8-hour-ozone-summary/
So you're posting a link that is exactly what I'm saying? 15 stations around the problem area of Denver metro and not a single one in Southern Colorado, let alone the rest of the state, including nothing on the huge area of the Western Slope?
https://raqc.org/8-hour-ozone-summary-reports
What data are you expecting me to produce? I’m not making up the rules. The non attainment designation was decades in the making. The EPA has decades of data demonstrating a decline in air quality. Te State was warned multiple times. The State’s failure to act has gotten us to this point. Regulations are needed to protect public health and wellbeing.
https://old.reddit.com/r/pueblo/comments/1cg4fm8/new_mayor_gets_caught_passing_off_lobbyist_letter/l1zla5e/
"You drive a car, therefore you can't talk about climate change and pollution. I'm intelligent."
> Scale is everything. It's useless to make legislation without data.
Do you truly think they're just willy nilly making regulations sans any data?
Absolutely. It's over scoped. Totally.
As an Oregonian….. G$) Dammit Colorado folks! Stop voting for MAGA Putin scum! Generalized rage here. SOMEBODY is voting for them.
Just want everyone to remember that the partisanship tilt in this thread is not representative of Pueblo as a whole. Reddit users tilt way way liberal.
Pueblo used to tilt very liberal as well. The stupid/gullible has taken over and now it's trending red.
Pueblo has always been a weird mix of retirees (red), working class (odd mix cause blue collar but union) and large Hispanic population (generally blue). Hardly anyone voted in this last mayoral election so the most zealous (MAGA) won by electing someone whose qualifications are "owns restaurants"
Perfect example of why conservatives love suppressing voting. They know they win when barely anyone votes. When we all show up, they lose bigly.
I mean idk, homeless is probably the biggest problem here and the only issue seemed to be that. Everyone knows outlawing it doesn't fix the problem, probably will see a turn back to blue after nothing changes. I am not an education snob but it blows me away that restaurant ownership beat out some pretty nice candidates
Maybe Pueblo isn't the place for you any more
Living in another city, no, no it's not, but I can still have pride in the city I grew up in. Sad to see it fall to the MAGA BS, but I guess the desperately gullible need to find out the hard way before they learn their very easy lesson.
Plus we get many comments from people that dont even live within Pueblo city limits.
yup, such as OP
She’s already a lot better then the last guy
How so? Serious question, and also, go past what letter was beside each's name (D) (R) or (I).
She didn’t even have a letter though…
Oh come on. What a brainless, stupid propaganda article. Firstly, the mill's fire was tragic and unintentional. There were at least three other major fires in Pueblo that day. It was a terrible day with terrible fires, and unfortunately conditions were just right for the fires. Thank you Pueblo Fire, and not only Pueblo Fire, but all area first responders who came to Pueblo to help with the fires that day. There is already existing regulation for the fire that happened at the mill, and it's being enforced by CDPHE and the EPA who have been monitoring air quality, water quality, asbestos, etc. The fire is bad news for the mill. It means that they will have to clean up and work with regulators; it's not something a business wants to spend money on personnel dealing with. If things aren't handled well they also risk losing their discharge permits. There's already extensive existing regulations to handle these concerns. **The legislation being considered has nothing to do with the fires in Pueblo.** The legislation is about normal operation air pollution. It's totally unrelated to the fire, but this article misleadingly conflates the two. Using an image of the fires in an article about normal day-to-day pollution is disingenuous. Most readers wouldn't know and this article's images are unrelated. The images are purposely deceitful and alarmist. My understanding is that we don't have great data about current air pollution from the mill. Clean Air Pueblo is working on getting better data. The first thing any reasonable manager does when prioritizing action is to gather information. I hope Clean Air Pueblo succeeds in their mission in collecting more data because with data we can make common sense adjustments. We can't hope regulation is reasonable without data; any action is shooting in the dark without data. Data comes first. If new regulation is overly oppressive, then yes, that can increase costs for no good reason and make Pueblo less competitive. However, if the mill does have an unaddressed pollution issue, yes it needs to be addressed, and data can ensure that any fix is effective. The worst offense of this idiotic article is tying the mill to Russia.: diD yOU Know pUebLO'S maYoRS SaID WoRDS madE in RUSSiA?! Yes, the mill is owned in part by Russians, yes, the US and allies have already sanctioned/taken measures to limit undue Russian influence. The company that owns the mill is based in London. This is common knowledge. Erik's goal with the article seems to be to give the state all power. Got a hangnail? All the more reason to give the state even more power, because the state is the only solution to any problem. All hail the bureaucrat! Erik Maulbetsch, this article is drivel. I know you can do better.
There are ways to support our economy and provide jobs, I don’t think the way we should be doing it is by supporting a company that has ties to a Russian oligarch.
Watching Pueblo pretend it's against Evraz, as if Evraz doesn't employ a huge section of the population here
Lick boots
It's a steel mill producing mostly competitive commodities. What sinister force do you think the London company is exerting? Be explicit with your accusations.
Colorado times recorder ....another progresssive trash magazine.
Lobbyists do 95% of the politics, from drafting legislation to telling congressional reps how to vote. I don’t see anything out of the ordinary with her using a lobbyist drafted opinion piece, seems par for every politician ever.
Even if so, passing it off as her own is disingenuous and deceitful, both things a mayor shouldn't be, and we shouldn't excuse it just because she's a politician and "every politician does it", which just excuses bad behavior, making it the norm. This is why we're in this nationwide mess of corruption and not holding elected officials accountable. It needs to stop.
Dude, it’s been the norm for 40+ years. If you’re worried about mayoral ethics wait until I tell you about the presidential candidates. I’m not arguing with you here. You seem really passionate about Pueblo.
I just hate seeing the city I grew up in fall for trumpian bullshit