Every election season, the Club 20 coalition in Grand Junction hosts debates for candidates in races across the Western Slope. Club 20 is made up of counties, municipalities, businesses, and associations in western Colorado. Though the group was originally focused on the need for paved roads, the coalition now participates in a variety of advocacy and outreach efforts, including political action.
CD3 candidates get into the dollars and cents of agriculture, economy
The candidates for Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, Republican Jeff Hurd and Democrat Adam Frisch, squared off in a debate hosted by Club 20 in Grand Junction on Saturday. The hour-long debate touched on topics including the economy of rural Colorado, water, energy, immigration policy, and abortion.
Frisch expressed his full support for a woman's right to make her own reproductive health care decisions. He asked Hurd how he would vote on Amendment 79, the ballot measure that would enshrine the right to abortion in Colorado’s constitution. Hurd said he believed abortion is a state's rights issue.
“I appreciate that you don't want federal politicians overriding a woman's healthcare decisions, but you're okay with the state politicians doing it?” asked Frisch.
Hurd said he was pro-life with exceptions, “but I believe this issue should generally be left to the states,” he said.
When it came to energy, Hurd criticized Democratic policies, blaming them for job losses, particularly among power plant operators and miners. The Republican emphasized the need for a balanced approach to energy that includes fossil fuels, renewables, and nuclear power.
”We need to pick the best resources that will provide reliable resource adequacy for our growing electric demand. And nuclear is key to that,” Hurd said.
Frisch also said he supports the inclusion of nuclear energy in the district's energy portfolio.
“ It's really, really hard for anyone to look me straight in the face and talk about decarbonizing our country's energy sources without nuclear power being part of that conversation,” he said.
“I'm very excited, like a lot of people in Colorado, especially up in northwest Colorado, to watch what's happening with TerraPower that just broke ground for next generation small modular nuclear.”
On the issue of water, both candidates expressed similar positions. Adam Frisch argued for more storage projects and emphasized the need to protect the state’s interests in the Colorado River Compact. Jeff Hurd also argued for more water storage projects and accused California, Arizona, and Nevada of using more than their allocated water under the Colorado River Compact.
Adam Frisch criticized Jeff Hurd’s connection to former Republican Gov. Bill Owens during the debate. Owens, who supports Hurd, is involved in a project that seeks to pump water from the San Luis Valley to the Denver metro area.
When it came to debating the state of the economy, Hurd pointed to federal spending as a key driver of inflation.
I know we roll our eyes when we see how much the federal government spends and we hear those numbers,” Hurd said. “But here’s the thing, you go to Chick-fil-A nowadays, you pay $50, or you fill up your grocery cart with nothing and you're spending a hundred dollars. Why is that? Because our federal government is spending too much money.”
Frisch argued that corporate consolidation, particularly within the agricultural sector, is fueling rising prices.
“The agricultural industry, as farmers know now compared to where they were 30, 40 years ago, they have a lot fewer options of which to sell their goods,” explained Frisch. “In 1980, the average farmer was taking home about 30 cents of every dollar that was spent. It's now down to under nine cents.”
During the debate, Adam Frisch repeatedly asserted that he was not taking corporate PAC money. He asked Jeff Hurd if he regretted accepting corporate PAC donations, prompting a heated response from the Republican.
"You take corporate money," Hurd said. "Not corporate PAC money, but he takes liberal PAC money that comes from corporations."
Colorado’s Third Congressional District is currently represented by Lauren Boebert who announced late last year that she would be moving to Colorado’s Fourth Congressional District.
Buerger, Catlin talk western slope values in Senate District 5 debate
Colorado’s Senate District 5 covers all of Gunnison, Hinsdale, and Pitkin counties, and parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Montrose counties.
It’s currently represented by Republican Perry Will, who was appointed to fill the vacancy left by Carbondale’s Bob Rankin in 2023. He is not seeking re-election to his current seat, and is instead running for the District 2 seat on Garfield County’s board of county commissioners.
Democrat Cole Buerger of Glenwood Springs and Republican is Marc Catlin of Montrose are vying for the seat in the November election. Buerger is a small business owner, and owns Rislende in Silt; Catlin currently serves as the representative for Colorado’s House District 58.
Both Buerger and Catlin emphasized their Colorado roots, having been born and raised in western Colorado. The candidates also emphasized rural issues, particularly water, housing, and infrastructure.
Catlin has made a name for himself in the Colorado water world as an advocate for keeping water in western Colorado. He spoke about his support for Shoshone permanency, an effort by the Colorado River District to purchase one of the oldest water rights on the Colorado River. The district says that keeping the water flowing benefits the entire river system.
“I ran and passed a bill this year to put another $20 million from state coffers into purchasing that water right for the benefit of the Western Slope,” he said, adding that the Shoshone water right receiving its full allotment meant downstream farmers and ranchers got that water as well. “If agriculture’s water is still in the river, it still has benefits for environmentalists and recreationists.”
Buerger agreed with Catlin’s assessment on the importance of water for agriculture, and said water wasn’t a partisan issue on the Western Slope — everyone wants to keep it here.
“Prior appropriation is going to be a critical piece of that and should guide us in every way, to make sure we’re protecting the agriculture rights and historic rights before any usage,” he said.
Both also cited affordability and the cost of living as big priorities.
Catlin said he wanted to see local solutions for different communities before the state gets involved.
“We need to bring all of them to the same table and put them together so everyone has something to pitch in, then bring the local builders in and see what we can do and how we can go about doing it,” he said. “Then we would go to the state and start talking about grants.”
Buerger said he’d like to see the state work on cutting red tape, making it easier to build housing.
“I think we need to get out of the way, whether that’s construction defects, whether that’s making sure we can streamline some of the zoning and local control areas, making sure we’re working on program partnerships and finding good, reliable sources of sustainable funding for what’s already passed the state legislature, including the affordable housing fund,” he said.
They both agreed that they wanted to see private sector partners work with local groups on affordable housing solutions.
Velasco, Waller talk cooperation in House District 57 debate
House District 57 covers Pitkin and Garfield counties, and the portion of Eagle County that includes Basalt and the I-70 corridor to Dotsero.
The candidates differed in their philosophies on government, with Waller emphasizing deregulation and free market solutions, while Velasco favored using state resources to support local initiatives.
Waller said he hadn’t been impressed with the Colorado state government’s responses to issues like the housing crisis and high cost of living.
“Excessive regulations are infringing on our freedoms, hurting our economy,” he said. “And the only solutions that are coming from the government (have) been higher taxes, more handouts, resulting in less affordability.”
As the incumbent, Velasco has referenced her legislative record throughout her campaign.
She pointed to her committee experience when it came to agriculture, water, and energy production.
“We created guidelines for hydrogen energy that are now the federal standards,” she said of her work on the Energy and Environment committee. “We are leading when it comes to clean energy. We want everyone in our communities to have access to affordable, reliable energy.”
During the back-and-forth round, where candidates can ask each other questions, they continued offering those different visions about how a state lawmaker should cooperate with local officials.
Velasco asked Waller to name three infrastructure projects in the district.
Waller instead responded with his philosophy towards local and state cooperation.
“I believe in freedom,” he said. “I believe that as we support our local municipalities and our communities and the efforts that they’re leading, as a future legislator, I believe in empowering these individuals to do the right jobs, and do the job well, and I will support them in whatever way possible that I can.”
Velasco said it’s important to be aware of these projects so lawmakers can secure funding and other resources from the state if eligible, then pointed to some examples.
“One is the water plant improvement in Silt, to make sure all our residents have access to clean water,” she said. “Another one is turning a hotel into 70 affordable housing units to support working families in Parachute and Battlement Mesa. We’re also supporting the roundabout improvements in New Castle to make sure we have access to safe roads.”
Both Waller and Velasco, along with Buerger and Catlin, will be in Glenwood Springs this Thursday for the chamber of commerce’s “Issues and Answers” night.
