If you are interested in articles about water, read on. If not, stop and move on to something else.
I found an article about water in my files that dated back to 1987.
The article talks about the advent of the 300-year rule in El Paso County where the commissioners voted (by a narrow vote of 3-2) to require a 300-year supply of water before a developer could proceed. Eight developers and water districts sued the county claiming the ruling violated state law. The suit ended up before the Colorado Supreme Court where the 300-year rule was upheld and it has been the rule since then for all developments.
In the article I have a circled "1" beside a statement where the editorial says the 300-year rule will be a hindrance to growth. Now, 34 years later we know that the state has never turned down a new development because of water and development continues at a rapid pace even as water supplies are dwindling and becoming more critical for water districts in our area.
In item "2" I see some very false logic comparing water to firewood since firewood is a renewable resource and water is not.
In item "3" I would ask the question, "How does a potential home buyer "make sure" the home has a long-term water supply if he has a well?" That is a determination that must be made by the water experts and those experts are basing their conclusions on incomplete data as to the composition, permeability, transmissivity and other factors that are underground where no one knows for sure.
For item "4" the homebuilder has only to get a determination from the state as to water quality, quantity and availability (based on limited data) and away he goes. The issue of long-term water availability is left up to the home owner and the builder has reaped his profits and is long gone.
In the last paragraph, I wonder if the Gazette staff would make the same negative conclusions today?