Colorado
Neighbors make a final stand against massive oil and gas drilling plan near Aurora Reservoir
A contentious plan to drill up to 166 oil and gas wells on the southeastern fringe of metro Denver, near hundreds of homes and the Aurora Reservoir — a drinking water source for nearly 400,000 people — will finally land before state energy regulators this week for a key decision on its fate.
Neighbors worried about potential health and ecological impacts from the project want the Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission to say no to the plan after an extensive hearing that’s set to begin Tuesday. The oil and gas producer behind it hopes to install hydraulic fracturing operations at eight sites across Lowry Ranch in Arapahoe County over the next four years.
“The main problem is the effect on public welfare, safety and health,” said Marsha Kamin, who moved to Aurora’s Southshore neighborhood 18 months ago from Michigan. “We’re talking about thousands and thousands and thousands of people.”
As Colorado’s population has ballooned in recent decades, especially in Denver’s northern and eastern suburbs that overlay the mineral-rich Denver-Julesburg Basin, friction has grown between new and expanding neighborhoods and the oil and gas operations set up nearby. Six years ago, the evolving standoff led to an attempt by a citizen group to appreciably increase the required distance between wells and homes through a statewide ballot initiative. Voters shot it down.
Less than a year later, the legislature passed Senate Bill 19-181 and Gov. Jared Polis signed it into law. The law prioritized public health, safety and the environment when state officials consider oil and gas development — a profound change from the industry-focused approach Colorado had taken for decades with energy extraction.
Kamin and her neighbors, hundreds of whom are part of the Save the Aurora Reservoir advocacy group, are putting their hopes in Colorado’s five-year-old oil and gas reform law to halt the project. The group has been working to derail Crestone Peak Resources’ proposed fracking plan for the better part of two years.
“It’s disheartening that an industry can have this much power over people,” Kamin said.
But Lowry Ranch opponents may face a bumpy road this week, following a recommendation by the Energy and Carbon Management Commission’s director, Julie Murphy, that the board of commissioners approve the comprehensive area plan for the project.
In her final determination this month, Murphy wrote that Crestone’s plan “complies with all applicable requirements” in the ECMC’s rules.

The commission’s Tuesday hearing is scheduled to go all day, with a second meeting set for Friday if more time is needed. A decision to deny, approve or stay the plan is expected by week’s end, agency spokesman Chris Arend told The Denver Post.
If the overall plan wins approval, more hearings would be needed to consider individual well pads and wells, at both the state and county levels. Though the opponents largely live nearby in Aurora, Colorado’s third-largest city, the pads would be on state-owned land in an unincorporated part of the county just over Aurora’s city line.
While the ECMC approved more than 800 oil and gas wells in 2022 and more than 700 last year, it has denied applications to drill in recent years. In 2022, it said no to a plan from Kerr-McGee to drill 33 wells near a Firestone neighborhood. The commissioners’ main objection centered on 62 houses that would have been too close to a well pad, violating the state’s minimum 2,000-foot setback from homes and schools.
In January, the commission denied permits for 18 wells at Coyote Trails near the border of Erie and Broomfield.
Ann Hussain, who lives in Southshore with a sweeping backyard view of the Aurora Reservoir, said she learned about Crestone’s plans only in the spring. She worries that drilling under the reservoir could result in contaminants leaking into the body of water or into aquifers.

She also worries about air pollution generated at the well pads, one of which would lie less than a mile from a school. One of the eight pads, dubbed State Sunlight-Long, would be just 3,200 feet from her back fence. Thirty-two wells are planned for Sunlight-Long.
“I can’t believe you can take a community and set up an industry right outside these backyards,” Hussain said. “How is it that this can be done so close to people’s homes?”
Plan meets more expansive county buffer
The answer to that question lies in the state’s oil and gas rules, which permit drilling outside a 2,000-foot buffer from schools and neighborhoods. Last fall, Arapahoe County commissioners imposed even wider setbacks than what the state requires, mandating a 3,000-foot buffer between wells and occupied structures, landfills and reservoirs — both existing and planned.
That rule-making followed an attempt by project opponents in April 2023 to get Arapahoe County to impose a six-month halt on issuing new permits to energy companies to drill. The county commissioners voted 3-2 to reject a moratorium.
Rich Coolidge, a spokesman for Crestone parent company Civitas Resources, said not only does the Lowry Ranch plan comply with state rules, it also hews to Arapahoe County’s oil and gas regulations.
“The redundant safeguards and subsequent monitoring have shown that oil and natural gas development can safely occur without impacting groundwater and surface water sources,” Coolidge wrote in an email. “In fact, multiple layers of steel casing and cement underneath more than a mile of rock separate the wellbore from our state’s aquifers and surface water like the Aurora Reservoir.”

Crestone plans to drill 7,500 feet below the surface before running its wells horizontally. Coolidge said wells have “been drilled over a mile below tens of thousands of homes in the Front Range, with no impacts.”
Crestone will implement measures to mitigate impacts at its well sites, he said, including soundwalls, electric-powered drilling rigs, low-emission engines and low-odor mud during the drilling phase. Oil, gas and water will travel off-site by pipe, he said, “to reduce truck traffic during the production phase.”
Dan Haley, the president and CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, said the state’s 2019 oil and gas law was meant to “create the most environmentally protective rules in the country … without banning the production of this vital resource.”
“Arapahoe County, and others, have passed regulations that exceed the state’s already stringent protections,” he said, “and our members are meeting those high expectations and producing this resource cleaner and better than most anywhere in the world.”
Congressman focuses on Superfund site
But such assurances haven’t quieted concerns about the unique features at Lowry Ranch, a 26,500-acre sweep of prairie owned by the Colorado State Land Board.
The property encompasses the 480-acre Lowry Landfill, a Superfund site at the northeast corner of Quincy Avenue and Gun Club Road, where an estimated 138 million gallons of liquid industrial waste are buried. An underground plume of contaminated water has migrated several miles from what is considered one of the country’s most contaminated toxic waste sites.
Some of the proposed well pads’ proximity prompted U.S. Rep. Jason Crow to send a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency on July 15. He asked whether it had studied the potential for extractive seismic activity at the landfill and how that might impact “the safety of the Aurora Reservoir Dam and the reservoir itself.”
The Democratic congressman asked how the agency could “be certain the drilling will not cause fractures and instability that threaten the mitigation strategies EPA has in place at (the landfill).” He also inquired if the agency has considered expanding the boundaries of the Superfund site to include the underground plume.
Coolidge, from Civitas, said the company this year agreed not to drill underneath the Lowry Landfill.
“On claims around seismicity, there has been no reportable seismic activity caused by hydraulic fracturing in Colorado,” he wrote.
But Mike Foote, an environmental attorney representing Save the Aurora Reservoir — and a prime sponsor of SB19-181 when he was a state senator — said “drilling can cause earthquakes.”
The United States Geological Service says that while most induced earthquakes are not directly the result of fracking, they can be triggered by the “disposal of waste fluids that are a byproduct of oil production.”
“You don’t want to cause earthquakes, and Crestone hasn’t studied or addressed the issue anywhere close to adequately enough to allow them to drill,” Foote said.

Drilling could begin next year
Matt Sura, an oil and gas attorney who represents local governments and conservation organizations, said the five-year-old law was a critical step in more effectively regulating the energy industry and giving local governments a bigger voice in the process. Sura is not involved in the Lowry Ranch proposal.
“Senate Bill 181 required that there be public hearings on locations (of wells and equipment) and allowed the public to speak to the decision-makers, rather than those decisions (being) made administratively,” he said. “That was a huge sea change.”
Where there is still room for improvement, Sura said, is in state regulators addressing the cumulative impacts of oil and gas development, specifically when it comes to air pollution. The ECMC will start hearings on rules for that in mid-September.
“I’m hopeful the commission is going to be willing to set limits on oil and gas development and drilling — and the amount of pollution that can be emitted from the oil and gas industry,” he said.
But those rules won’t be in place this week when the ECMC meets to consider the Lowry Ranch comprehensive area plan.
The Front Range for years has been out of compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In 2022, the EPA designated the nine-county northern Front Range region — including metro Denver — as being in “severe nonattainment,” triggering more federal regulations to clean the air.
That frustrates Kamin, the Southshore resident who watches wildlife move through the neighborhood on their way to and from the rolling hills of Lowry Ranch to the east.
“We’ve been a nonattainment area for years and they want to add more pollution to the area,” she said. “It makes no sense.”
If Crestone’s plan receives the blessing of the ECMC this week, drilling could begin as early as 2025.
Denver Post reporter Judith Kohler contributed to this story
Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.
Originally Published:
Colorado
How the Colorado Rockies Are Actually Building Its Opening Day Roster
The Colorado Rockies are seeking the right balance and experimenting under their first full-year manager, Warren Schaeffer.
It’s a different Rockies roster compared to last season. There are new faces on the active roster for the start of the 2026 season. Having a team with youth and a mix of veterans can be a successful formula for the Rockies.
Knowing how the elevation affects things in Colorado, the Rockies will see which pitcher can thrive playing in Coors Field. Anything can happen this season.
The Rockies Must Have A Roster That Can Stay Durable
A Rotation of Veterans
Rockies president of baseball operations Paul DePodesta added several arms over 34, including Michael Lorenzen, Jose Quintana, and Tomoyuki Sugano.
The fifth starter will be a competitive battle. The Rockies have options in who will win that fifth and final spot. Here is the prediction of the Rockies’ starting rotation:
- Kyle Freeland
- Michael Lorenzen
- Ryan Feltner
- Jose Quintana
- Chase Dollander
Ryan Feltner has battled injuries. The 29-year-old suffered back spasms and shoulder injuries, preventing him from performing in 2025. He’s determined to have a breakout season.
He had a lot of momentum in his final 15 starts of the 2024 season. Feltner posted a 2.75 ERA and finished with a career-high 162 1/3 innings. Feltner has been building his weight-room capacity and getting himself ready for the new season. Hopefully, he can stay healthy and produce.
Flexibility on the Infield
The Rockies’ acquisition of Willi Castro was a smart move. We know the Rockies’ future at shortstop is Ezequel Tovar. However, the Rockies organization is being cautious. They want to make sure they have an extra body on hand in case something goes south. Castro is a former All-Star and a versatile defender.
Eduoard Julien is known for playing second base, but he can also play first base if the Rockies need him there. It all depends on many situations and circumstances. Julien is one of the players on the Rockies roster who must prove his worth.
In terms of first base, TJ Rumfield is a front-office option to serve that position. He has the size, length, and youth to play the position. Rumfield is having an impressive start to the spring so far.
Current Roster and Opening Day Prediction Lineup
Ezequiel Tovar, SS
Tyler Freeman, 2B
Mickey Moniak, DH
Hunter Goodman, C
Kyle Karros, 3B
Jordan Beck, RF
Brenton Doyle, CF
Jake McCarthy, LF
TJ Rumfield, 1B
The lineup can change overnight, and especially in the next few weeks. If, for some reason, Freeman can’t okay second base to start the season, then Castro is the leading man to take the spot.
Colorado
Colorado quarterback Dominiq Ponder dies in single-car crash at age 23, police say
BOULDER, Colo. (AP) – Colorado quarterback Dominiq Ponder died early Sunday morning in a single-car crash, police said. He was 23.
Ponder was driving a 2023 Tesla when he lost control on a curve and hit a guardrail, according to the Colorado State Patrol. The car struck an electrical line pole and rolled down an embankment.
Ponder was pronounced dead at the scene in Boulder County. Police said a preliminary investigation “shows that speed is suspected as a factor.”
Ponder played in two games for the Buffaloes last season, going 0-for-1 passing and carrying the ball twice for a loss of 4 yards. The 6-foot-5 sophomore from Opa Locka, Florida, began his collegiate career at Bethune-Cookman before transferring.
The Buffs were slated to begin spring practice on Monday.
“God please comfort the Ponder family, friends & Loved ones,” Colorado coach Deion Sanders posted on X. “Dom was one of my favorites! He was Loved, Respected & a Born Leader. Let’s pray for all that knew him & had the opportunity to be in his presence. Lord you’re receiving a good 1.”
Colorado offensive coordinator Brennan Marion reposted Sanders’ statement and called Ponder a joy to be around and coach.
“Getting that call from his dad today didn’t feel real,” Marion posted. “Love you Dom! God cover his family & our team, especially our qb room!”
Colorado athletic director Fernando Lovo said Ponder “epitomized the values of passion, enthusiasm, leadership, toughness, and intelligence that were revered by his teammates and coaches alike.” The athletic department said it would make counseling resources available to players and staff.
Fellow Colorado quarterback Colton Allen also paid tribute to Ponder on Instagram.
“Dom, you were a blessing to so many people,” Allen wrote. “You had a presence about you that just made everything better. You brought so much joy to me and everyone around you. I’m grateful for every lift, every practice, every rep, every conversation we got to share. I’ll carry those with me for the rest of my life.”
The Big 12 Conference extended its condolences in a post on X.
___
Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here. AP college football: apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and apnews.com/hub/college-football
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Colorado
Colorado lawmakers duel over data centers: Grant millions in tax breaks or regulate them without incentives?
Colorado lawmakers are deciding this year between two disparate approaches on data centers — one that aims to lure them to the Centennial State with millions of dollars in tax incentives and another that would implement some of the strictest statewide regulations in the country on the booming tech industry.
Either of the two competing bills would create the state’s first regulations specific to data centers. Sponsors of both bills say they hope to minimize environmental impacts from the power and water demands of the centers, while also ensuring that the cost of new infrastructure they need doesn’t wind up on residents’ electric bills.
Both bills are sponsored by Democrats but differ widely in what they’d do.
The bill supported by the data center industry — House Bill 1030 — would incentivize companies to comply with regulations in exchange for large tax breaks. The legislation would not regulate data centers whose owners forgo a tax break.
The other bill — Senate Bill 102 — would offer no incentives, instead imposing regulations on all large data center development across the state. It is supported by environmental and community groups.
“We want to make sure that as data centers come here, they come on our terms,” said Megan Kemp, the Colorado policy representative for Earthjustice’s Rocky Mountain office.
The bills have landed as debate over the future of data center regulation intensifies across the state. Data centers house the computer servers that function as the main infrastructure for the digital world. They crunch financial data, store patients’ health information, process online shopping, register sports betting and — increasingly — make possible the heavy data demands of artificial intelligence.
Several companies have begun construction on large data centers across the Front Range in recent years. A 160-megawatt hyperscale facility is under development in Aurora and could consume as much power as 176,000 homes once completed.
The construction of a 60-megawatt data center campus in north Denver has angered those who live by the site and prompted Denver city leaders last week to call for a moratorium on new data center development while they craft regulations for the industry. Larimer County and Logan County have enacted similar moratoriums.
Hundreds gathered Tuesday night at a community meeting about the northern Denver campus owned by CoreSite. Frustration in the crowd — which filled overflow rooms and the front lawn of the building that hosted the meeting — erupted as residents of the neighborhoods surrounding the center expressed concerns about how it would impact their air quality, power and water supplies.
Attendees said they did not know the data center was being built until they saw construction underway.
CoreSite leaders had planned to attend the meeting. But they pulled out of participating the day before because of safety concerns, company spokeswoman Megan Ruszkowski wrote in an email. She did not elaborate on the concerns. A Denver police spokesman said the department did not have any record of a police report filed by CoreSite in the days prior to the meeting.
CoreSite’s absence left officials from the city and utilities to answer the crowd’s questions and field their frustrations. City leaders told attendees that they had no say in whether the data center could be built because there are no city regulations specific to the industry.
“Data centers are proliferating quickly and we don’t know all the impacts,” said Danica Lee, the city’s director of public health investigations. “That’s why we need this moratorium.”
Promises of future regulation meant little to the residents of Elyria-Swansea, where the data center is scheduled to go online this summer. More than an hour into the meeting, a man took the microphone. He noted that so much of the conversation had focused on technicalities — but the information provided had not answered a question on many residents’ minds.
“How do we stop it now?” he asked, to a loud round of applause from the room.
Transformative opportunity?
Some in the state Capitol think more data centers would be beneficial for Colorado.
Supporters of the tax incentive bill in the legislature said luring the industry to Colorado would create high-paying jobs, help pay for electrical grid modernizations and strengthen local tax bases.
“This could be transformative for the state,” said Rep. Alex Valdez, a Denver Democrat who is one of HB-1030’s sponsors.
In exchange for complying with rules, data center companies would be exempted from sales and use taxes for 20 years for purchases related to the data center, like the expensive servers they must replace every few years. After two decades, the companies could apply for an extension to the exemption.
To earn the tax break, data center companies would have to meet requirements that include:
- Breaking ground on the data center within two years.
- Investing at least $250 million into the data center within five years.
- Creating full-time jobs with above-average wages, though the legislation doesn’t specify how many jobs would be required.
- Using a closed-loop water cooling system that minimizes water loss, or a cooling system that does not use water.
- Working to make sure the data center “will not cause unreasonable cost impacts to other utility ratepayers.”
- Consulting with the Colorado Department of Natural Resources about wildlife and water impacts.
While the bill would exempt data centers from sales tax on some purchases, they would still be on the hook for all other taxes, Valdez said, and would bring both temporary and permanent jobs. The bill does not specify how many permanent jobs must be created to qualify for the tax break.
Dozens of other states have enacted tax incentive programs for data centers. Such incentives are a key factor that companies weigh when deciding where to build, said Dan Diorio, the vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, an industry group.
“Colorado is not competitive right now,” he said.
Figuring out the projected impact of the bill on the state’s finances gets complicated.
The legislature’s nonpartisan analysts estimated that the state would miss out on $92.5 million in sales tax revenue in the first three years, assuming a total of 17 data centers would qualify for the tax breaks in that time period.
But Valdez said that is revenue that the state otherwise wouldn’t see if the data centers weren’t built here. And the companies would still pay all other state and local taxes, he said.
“We see it as unrealized revenue, rather than a tax cut,” he said.
Some of that lost tax revenue would be offset by an increase in income taxes paid by low-income families, according to the bill’s fiscal note.
That’s because the projected decrease in sales tax revenue in the first year of the program would decrease the amount of money available for the state to provide its recently enacted Family Affordability Tax Credit. State law ties the amount available for the family tax credit to state revenue growth and whether the state collects money above a revenue cap set by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. TABOR requires money above that level to be returned to taxpayers.
If the state doesn’t have excess revenue, it can’t fund that tax credit.
In the next fiscal year, which begins in July, data center companies would avoid paying $29 million in sales taxes, which would trigger a change in the family tax credit. Low-income families would be made to pay a total of $106 million more, the fiscal note estimates.
Bill sponsors are planning to address the fallout for the tax credit in forthcoming amendments, Valdez said.
“We’re not out to trigger any negative impacts to low-income families,” he said.

Baseline guardrails
Forgoing tax dollars during a state budget crisis is a hard sell to Rep. Kyle Brown, a Louisville Democrat sponsoring the regulatory bill. He and other supporters of SB-102 aren’t convinced tax incentives are necessary to bring data centers to the state.
Major construction projects are already underway, he said. In Denver, CoreSite chose not to pursue $9 million in tax breaks from the city but continued construction on its facility regardless.
“The point of our policy is (putting) reasonable, baseline guardrails on this development so it can be smart,” Brown said.
Brown last session co-sponsored a failed bill with Valdez that offered tax incentives to data centers. Since then, however, he’s seen other states that offer tax incentives express buyers’ remorse, he said.
Brown pointed to concerns in Virginia about rising electricity costs due to data center demand and a proposal by the governor of Illinois to suspend the state’s tax credit so that the impacts of the data center boom it sparked could be studied.
His bill this session — co-sponsored by Sen. Cathy Kipp, a Fort Collins Democrat — requires that data centers over 30 megawatts:
- Draw as much power as possible from newly sourced renewable energy by 2031.
- Pay for any additions or changes to the grid needed to serve the data center.
- Adhere to local rules about water efficiency.
- Limit the use of backup generators that consume fossil fuels; if such generators are necessary, they must be a certain type that limits emissions.
- Conduct an analysis of the data center’s impacts on local neighborhoods, engage in community outreach and sign a legally binding good-neighbor agreement if the community is disproportionately affected by pollution.
Owners of data centers would also need to report metrics annually to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. They would cover the center’s annual electricity consumption, how much of that power came from renewable sources, the total number of hours backup generators were used and annual water use.
Utilities, too, would face additional requirements.
The legislation would ban utilities from offering discounted rates to large data centers. It also would prohibit them from supplying electricity to a data center if doing so would affect the utility’s ability to provide power to its other customers — or its ability to meet state emissions reduction goals.
Environmental groups supporting the bill say the state needs regulations to make sure the increased electrical demand generated by data centers doesn’t expand the state’s use of fossil fuels or slow the retirement of fossil fuel-powered plants.
If not done thoughtfully, the groups said, the increased electrical load could imperil the state’s climate goals.
“What we need to avoid is a race to attract data centers that turns into a race to the bottom,” said Alana Miller, the Colorado policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council’s climate and energy program.
If the legislature enacts SB-102, it would implement the strictest data center regulations in the country and would ward off future data center development, Diorio said. He sees many of the rules as unattainable.
“It would make it nearly impossible to develop a data center in the state of Colorado,” he said.
Conversations between the sponsors of the two bills are underway, Valdez and Brown said. Both expressed hope that a consensus could be found between the two pieces of legislation.
Neither bill had been scheduled for a committee hearing.
Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts5 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
News1 week agoWorld reacts as US top court limits Trump’s tariff powers