No evil plot, just a ‘no’ vote on hydro
November 5, 2012
I’ve decided to step up and reveal myself as part of this evil cabal of special interests opposed to the hydro plan on Castle Creek. I don’t live on Castle Creek, nor do I own any real estate on it nor have any other financial position related to it. But when I can figure out just how opposing hydro on it is going to make me money or gain me political power, I’ll let you know. Or maybe Rachel Richards can tell me, and I’ll pass it along. Otherwise it would seem like casting all of those who oppose hydro on Castle Creek as special interests or stooges thereof is baseless name-calling. And certainly that can’t be the case.
Yes, it sounds even shakier when people such as Richards pile on with their blackmailish-sounding threats that everyone in Aspen will have to pay exorbitant electric bills just to cover the debt on money already spent if it isn’t approved at this election. And yes, that seems like nothing but fearmongering in support of a bad idea that should never have been initiated without much more study and a much more thorough and honest ballot process than the joke that is now used as its excuse.
Of course, the city could have and should have waited for another vote before proceeding because now this rush to appear to be the greenest community around, wherein some of our public servants have failed to actually study what they’re doing, certainly makes it appear that we are just expected to support them solely because they are wise and know what’s best for us. But that can’t really be true, can it?
Virtually everyone I know who opposes this hydro plan, except for a few miscreants, is very much in favor of all renewable energy options when they are sensible and viable and don’t give up more than we get back. We can’t always pick our allies. But I don’t believe I have to support a fundamentally flawed program, that has become primarily a test of the wills and egos of those who proposed it to begin with, just to prove my green credentials or to avoid hanging out in bad company.
God knows we have studied and voted the entrance-to-Aspen issue almost forever. But now when it’s suggested that we don’t know enough to go ahead with this major project that’s had only one half-assed, open-ended vote and way too little legitimate research, we’re portrayed as actually being up to some other, more sinister purpose? Please. If this is such a slam dunk of an idea, why the heavy-handed push to judgment? Why can’t it stand on its merits without the threats and innuendo?
Recommended Stories For You
Please vote “no” on this hydro plan this time. That’s all anyone is asking. No big plot.