Commissioners make final approval of SDPR regulations

Also places moratorium on projects if resolution goes to court

The Gunnison Board of County Commissioners at a regular meeting on Tuesday, September 1, voted to approve an amended version of the Special Development Project Resolution SDPR that was discussed at a public hearing last week.

The resolution passed by the commissioners will amend the definition of carbon neutral in the SDPR to say that projects are required to be “in compliance with Gunnison County carbon neutral policy and/ or standards existing at the time the formal application is filed with Gunnison County.”
In the final weeks before the County Planning Commission sent their suggested version of the SDPR to the county commissioners for adoption, a provision requiring carbon neutrality was added after much debate among the planning commissioners.
It simply said, “Proposed projects shall be carbon neutral,” meaning there can be “no net contribution into the atmosphere of carbon dioxide or other gases that when emitted into the atmosphere trap heat,” as a result of the operation.
There had been some major concern about the carbon neutrality requirement from companies that could propose projects that would be reviewed under the SDPR, such as the Mt. Emmons Moly Company and Crested Butte Mountain Resort (CBMR).
The concerns ranged from the county trying to address a global problem with local legislation, to ambiguity in the term “carbon neutral.”
Advocates for the measure said it was the only option if the county intended to meet its stated goals of reducing carbon emissions.
The commissioners, at a public hearing on the SDPR on Tuesday, August 25, agreed that although there was unanimous support for such a measure in the SDPR someday, the BOCC shouldn’t force large projects to meet a standard that wasn’t being met by county’s own operations.
The process of creating and revising the SDPR has been going on for almost four years. The regulations are intended to cover mega-projects being proposed in the county in a separate set of standards, and to avoid adverse impacts to the county and its residents.
Another piece added to the SDPR through the amendment is language that enables the county to stop a mega-project if the legitimacy of the SDPR is questioned in court.
The resolution states, “If any guideline or standard of the Special Development Project Resolution is found to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, Gunnison County reserves the right… to forbid any person from engaging in the development regarding a matter of state interest, until Gunnison County adopts a further guideline or standard.”
Both the Mt. Emmons Moly Company and CBMR have suggested that the county does not have the legal authority to enforce the SDPR. The county has maintained that it does have the authority.
In a letter to the commissioners presented at last week’s public hearing, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forest supervisor Charlie Richmond said after a review by the USDA’s Office of the General Counsel, “we [the Forest Service] have significant concerns with the potential promulgation and enforcement of same, to the extent the Resolution might be applied to the lands and projects occurring on the National Forest System.”
Richmond goes on to say, “As such, we would urge the Commission to recognize the potential for conflicts regarding the issue of preemption of the Resolution by federal law, should it pass the Resolution as it now stands, and attempt to enforce same on NFS lands.”
Many of the same concerns have been raised by CBMR throughout the SDPR revision process.
Nonetheless, the commissioners did pass the resolution as amended and any future conflict will be dealt with in the court
system.