Interesting Information regarding the Wolf Creek Development

For Immediate Release Sept. 15, 2005

Contact: Jeff Berman, Executive Director, Colorado Wild

Durango, CO. Documents just released by the Forest Service under court order reveal that billionaire developer Red McCombs’ high powered Washington D.C. attorneys and lobbyists authored federal policy providing access across National Forest lands for the proposed Village at Wolf Creek. On June 23, 2005, Colorado Wild sued the Forest Service for violation of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), forcing release of the records.

According to Jeff Berman of Colorado Wild, “We’ve suspected the Forest Service was in bed with McCombs’ and his development manager Bob Honts all along. They’ve been stonewalling us for years, withholding documents that should have been available publicly from day one. Now that Colorado Wild has compelled them by lawsuit to open the records, it’s clear why. Plainly put, the developer is writing public land policies, and the Forest Service rubber stamps them as their own with no public input or process whatsoever.”

On June 14, 2004, Village developers submitted an application for final approval to Mineral County. A key component of that application was a March 11, 2004 letter from the Forest Service establishing the developer’s limited, seasonal use access. That letter was ghost written for the Forest Service by the developers’ own attorney and lobbyist Steve Quarles, with Crowell Moring in Washington DC. Through June 12, 2003, numerous emails and facsimiles – many of which the Forest Service continues to withhold the content of – show additional collusion on the policy.

“These are public lands that the Forest Service’s March 11, 2004 access determination directly and adversely affects. Yet Colorado Wild, the public, even the ski area, had no input – indeed weren’t even aware that such decisions were being made. This breach of public trust by Forest Service officials in Washington and Denver insult the public, diminish the role of dedicated local Forest Service employees, and undermine our democracy. This is insider politics at its worst” stated Berman.

Under the FOIA lawsuit overseen by U.S. Federal Magistrate David West in Durango, the Forest Service agreed to release all documents and provide a list of withheld documents by October 7, 2005. Colorado Wild anticipates that these additional documents will reveal yet more collusion between the Forest Service and the developer. “We believe this is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Brad Bartlett, attorney for Colorado Wild. “Based on the limited information we’ve obtained so far, we suspect that the developer and the agency have probably been working together behind closed doors for years without any public input or scrutiny.” Colorado Wild will likely have to challenge the Forest Service’s withholding of some forthcoming documents and of portions of already received documents.

On June 23, 2005, Colorado Wild also sued the Forest Service for permitting temporary access to the inholding for the summer of 2005. This litigation is ongoing, but will likely also be affected by the release of additional documents.


###




FSR 391 Access Authorizations Written by LMJV
as Forest Service Decisions Chronology



Sept. 13, 2005

Compiled by Colorado Wild


May 7, 2003: Fax from Steve Quarles of Crowell Moring representing LMJV, to Jim Snow, USDA OGC. Proposed access authorization letter ghost written for USDA Forest Service for access to LMJV property.

May 21, 2003: Kenn Pitt, USDA OGC in Lakewood, CO stating no further recommended changes.

May 21, 2003: Jim Snow emails draft letter back to Steve Quarles via assumed assistant “Kyru”.

May 27, 2003: Email from Jim Snow to Randy Burgess (Divide District Ranger, RGNF), Ken Pitt (OGC, Denver), and Ed Ryberg (USDA, RMR Office, Lakewood), stating that “Steve Quarles called this morning and said ‘we’re getting closer’ on the letter for his clients”, that Quarles asked “for the attached changes”, and “may have additional comments.”

May 29, 2003: Fax from Jim Snow to Steve Quarles, noting that Forest Service, Wolf Creek Ski Area, and developer are “agreeable to the use of 391 before, during, and after completion of the NEPA process…”

June 9, 2003: Fax from Jim Snow to Steve Quarles, forwarding suggested changes from District Ranger Burgess to Quarles and developer for input.

June 12, 2003: Fax from Jim Snow to Regional Forester Rick Cables, forwarding additional language suggested by Steve Quarles (representing LMJV) for the access determination letter.

March 11, 2004: Forest Service delivers final letter to Mr. Bob Honts, President and CEO of the Wolf Creek Development Corp. and Venturer LMJV, granting limited access.

June 14, 2004: Mr. Honts submits application to Mineral County for final approval, including the March 11, 2004 Forest Service letter as Attachment One-P-1 o demonstrate access required as per Resolution #00-13.

*** This is a partial list of key documents whose content has been observed. The content of many other additional documents has been withheld, thus they have not been included here. Under court order, the Forest Service will be releasing additional documents by Oct. 7, 2005.

--
Jeffrey A. Berman
Colorado Wild
P.O. Box 2434
Durango, CO 81302
phone: 970-385-9833
www.coloradowild.org

"There is no substitute for energy. The whole edifice of modern society is built on it... It is not 'just another commodity' but the precondition of all commodities..." E.F. Schumacher, 1973

Damn. This really sucks.
















I was hoping Wolf Creek decided to put a chairlift accessing something over 20 degrees in pitch.........

I can't say I'm suprised. SW Colorado's NFS honchos are criminals beyond reproach. One only has to look at the Animas La Plata affair to comprehend the level of insanity that exists in the policy making in the region.

Not surprised given current Admin's anti-wilderness policies. I am glad some organizations are out there "watching the store".
Money talks, don't it though. We better pony up some for the environmental groups to counter-balance the developers' deep pockets.

Who is responsible for this lack of oversight? Department of Interior? Gale Norton? Are there Senators keeping an eye on this?

Just curious, do you think this would this have gone down under an administration like Clinton's as well?

Is there any way to fuck with these powerful lobby's that are running roughshod over any hope of sensible policy in this nation?

What is the solution?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by str8line

Who is responsible for this lack of oversight? Department of Interior? Gale Norton? Are there Senators keeping an eye on this?

---

Forest Service is Dept. of Agriculture, Mike Johanns, this happened under his predecessor Ann Veneman

OK, so we while away the hours spewing carefully crafted idiocies, boniferous stoke and fractured fecunditties. Our amusement park for the mind.

Now might be a good time to contact your federal representatives and ask them to follow up on this little issue.

Especially for those of you who fail the federal government, bitch about taxes and lament the system. This is a perfect instance where the gubbermint is screwing up. It's your responsibility to fix it, nobody else's.

Take the 5 minutes to email your senator and representative, or call 'em.

The next project might be to start leaning on the BLM to let Silverton open zone 1.

A form letter for your senators or representative:

>>>>
Hi (Senator or Representative) X,
I've found a little festering instance
over in the Dept of Agriculture that's particularly
vexing to me.

There's a ski are in Colorado called Wolf Creek.
There's also a member of the wealthy named Red McCombs
who is using his money and lawyer, Steve Quarles, to
write policy on public lands that benefits McCombs
development objectives. McCombs has had Quarles author
letters that are passed by the Forest Service as
Forest Service letters.

The usual process for development at Wolf Creek has
not been followed, the Forest Service avoiding
hearings or the standard forms of public input.
The organization ColoradoWild has had to sue the Forest
Service to get letters and documents describing the process.

I know you're really busy with a lot of higher
priority issues like Iraq, Katrina and hopefully
campaign finance reform. But please see if you can
steer the Wolf Creek problem back a little bit towards
the public process it should be.

Heres'a link that can provide more information:

http://www.friendsofwolfcreek.org/

Thanks for your time,



<<<<

Virtually every law & bill in the Bush Admin is done this way.They companies right the law,the law makers cash the check & sign it into law! What could be more democratic than that?

Thanks Buster!
Letter sent to Sen. Ken Salazar...hopefully he gives a shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homerjay

Thanks Buster!
Letter sent to Sen. Ken Salazar...hopefully he gives a shit.

---

No, d00d...thank YOU. You da mang!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by freshie247

Virtually every law & bill in the Bush Admin is done this way.They companies right the law,the law makers cash the check & sign it into law! What could be more democratic than that?

---

Well said!!!

Now, we gotta figure out a way to start wrting our kind of laws... and, writing checks.

Thanks for the form letter Buster. Sent to Salazar and even Allard (not that he would do anything to stop this).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robokill1981

Thanks for the form letter Buster. Sent to Salazar and even Allard (not that he would do anything to stop this).

---

Right on bro! Thanks!!! Your state reps may be able to get some momentum too.

Hopefully Colorado Wild is able to get this new twist some attention from the News Media.

Hopefully people will take the time to contact their representatives and complain, even if they don't live in CO.

Corruption of this kind is a national issue. McCombs is from Texas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Highmen

...
Corruption of this kind is a national issue. McCombs is from Texas.

---

Oil money, maybe? Oily hands, probably.

Then again, oil money did give us Snowbird... :rolleyes:

Great news for Wolf Creek, development has been stopped by a state judge according to the Denver Post:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_3114556#

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/liv...014bzwolfg.gif

A Colorado judge has voided a permit issued by Mineral County for an Aspen-sized development atop Wolf Creek Pass.

District Judge O. John Kuenhold ruled Thursday that a dirt road across U.S. Forest Service land did not constitute adequate access for the $1 billion project planned by Texas billionaire Billy Joe "Red" McCombs. He has proposed hotels, 222,100 square feet of commercial space, and homes for up to 10,500 people.

The highly anticipated ruling in the suit, filed by the Wolf Creek Ski Corp. and Colorado Wild against Mineral County and the developers of the Village at Wolf Creek, means the project must begin again at the start of the subdivision-approval process.

The judge found that county commissioners misapplied state statutes and their own subdivision regulations in approving the final plan for the first phase of the development.

The commissioners' approval was "so devoid of evidentiary support that it can only be explained as an arbitary and capricious exercise of authority," Kuenhold wrote.

Mineral County may not reconsider the plan until McCombs obtains an access permit from the Forest Service and approval from the Colorado Department of Transportation to tie into Colorado 160, the judge said.

"The court issued a very common-sense decision that says you can't have access to a village of 10,000 people across a dirt road that is covered with snow nine months a year," said Jeff Parsons, an attorney for Colorado Wild.

McCombs' point man, Bob Honts, had a different take.

"What we have here is a total blessing on the entire plat except for permanent roads that we expect the Forest Service will approve by December," said Honts, president and chief executive of the resort venture.

Caught in the middle are the Mineral County commissioners.

They have been lambasted by officials in neighboring counties who fear their towns will bear the brunt of providing emergency and social services without benefiting from tax revenue.
Mineral County Attorney John Wilder said he was gratified that the judge rejected all but one of the more than two dozen challenges brought by Colorado Wild. The project will need additional county approvals before it gets a final nod.

"They can't sell anything until they get a supplemental resolution from the county," Wilder explained.

The Colorado Department of Transportation said it may require construction of a major interchange on the high mountain pass to accommodate the thousands of residents and visitors at the planned village.

Honts, meanwhile, signaled that he's ready to up the ante with the Pitcher family, which owns the Wolf Creek Ski Area.

"The reason we have to go through this is the ski area failed to honor its commitment with regard to access in 1999," he said. "Some of my lawyers are licking their lips. I don't know if that resort is worth what the damages are going to be."

"Honts, meanwhile, signaled that he's ready to up the ante with the Pitcher family, which owns the Wolf Creek Ski Area.
"The reason we have to go through this is the ski area failed to honor its commitment with regard to access in 1999," he said. "Some of my lawyers are licking their lips. I don't know if that resort is worth what the damages are going to be"
-----
Damn... these guys are scary, seriously.
Like truth said, the whole A-LP boondogle has been a reality down here for a while. Unfortunately, using that as a precedent, the outlook is not so good for Wolf Creek. It might take a long time, but these good old boys are used to getting their way.... which if fucking bullshit.
by the way.... anybody that starts a sentance with "some of my lawyers..." is someone to keep a skeptical and watchful eye on.
More letters sent, on top of lots of other letter.

This is a national issue

Cheers, SS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by str8line

Who is responsible for this lack of oversight? Department of Interior? Gale Norton? Are there Senators keeping an eye on this?

Just curious, do you think this would this have gone down under an administration like Clinton's as well?

Is there any way to fuck with these powerful lobby's that are running roughshod over any hope of sensible policy in this nation?

What is the solution?

---

Yes. We need to stop voting in the same people who participate in this type of BS, and contact your senators and representitives.

BUT.......your vote has more power in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lostinthetrees

Oil money, maybe? Oily hands, probably.

Then again, oil money did give us Snowbird... :rolleyes:

---

car dealer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by str8line

Just curious, do you think this would this have gone down under an administration like Clinton's as well?

---

Yup. Don't forget that under Clinton's administration the FTC allowed BP Amoco and Atlantic Richfield to merge.

Anyway, it looks like the courts have stepped up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Highmen

...The next project might be to start leaning on the BLM to let Silverton open zone 1.

---

Do I smell some duplicity? Is your leaning better than Red's? Not in the eyes of the tax collectors.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tippster

Do I smell some duplicity? Is your leaning better than Red's? Not in the eyes of the tax collectors.....

---

It's a bit different. I don't have lawyers ghost writing FS policy. I thought I had a community of like minded ski weirdos who would be interested in the development of a ski area for skiing sake, not for real estate development.

Aside from the lawyers, go ahead, correct me.

McCombs is the embodiment of evil. Made most of his money by starting Clearchannel, currently doing its level best to homogenize the airwaves with unlistenable pablum while monopolozing music venues so that they only book the same shitbox acts Clearchannel's entertainment booking subsidiary SFX wants to promote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buster Highmen

It's a bit different. I don't have lawyers ghost writing FS policy. I thought I had a community of like minded ski weirdos who would be interested in the development of a ski area for skiing sake, not for real estate development.

Aside from the lawyers, go ahead, correct me.

---

I meant no offense. You like to ski as untrammeled a mountain as possible, he likes to make money. It seems to me that he is merely using his resources to accomplish his goal. You asked your resources (the mentioned ski wierdo community) to accomplish yours. Could this be merely a matter of scale and preference? [/devil's advocate]

I wonder if your form letter helped in the decision. I would not be surprised if it did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lostinthetrees

Oil money, maybe? Oily hands, probably.

Then again, oil money did give us Snowbird... :rolleyes:

---

You're thinking of Snowbasin, owned by Sinclair Oil. I don't think Earl Holding started it, but he bought it and turned it into the megaplex it is today.

Sinclair also owns Sun Valley.

Maybe he's thinking of how Dick Bass made his fortune in Texas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tippster

I meant no offense. You like to ski as untrammeled a mountain as possible, he likes to make money. It seems to me that he is merely using his resources to accomplish his goal. You asked your resources (the mentioned ski wierdo community) to accomplish yours. Could this be merely a matter of scale and preference? [/devil's advocate]

I wonder if your form letter helped in the decision. I would not be surprised if it did.

---

But I think it's an important distinction. And maybe you're muckraking. No matter.

While bought and paid for policy can and does masquerade as a democratic process, I hope I can point out the distinction here. I'm not objecting to the development per se. I'm objecting to the method in which the development was justified.

And despite current plopular political philosophy, the end does not justify the means. The process that counts as well.

I doubt the letter had anything to do with the judicial result. But thanks for the schmooz. (please don't tell me I need a fucking winkie...).

I really have to stop arguing for the fun of it. But just not now...

Most Municipalities, especially one as cash poor as the one in question - we're not talking Arapahoe County here after all - will give credence to job creation and tax base expansion arguments over maintaining the status quo. Mountains only feed people (these days) if they generate income, be it natural resources or tourism.

Do the opponents have the moral/ethical high ground in this matter? In my opinion yes, but I'm sure those jobs (construction and Service Sector) will be greatly appreciated by the county and state government.

I would love not to have to sue the government under the Freedom of Information act for all public records that are deemed 'unseemly.' You are absolutely right that they should have provided them upon initial request without hesitation. His lawyers did nothing illegal.. the Sierra Club et al. have their own army of them on K Street doing the exact same thing. Unfortunately Big Business, by its very nature, has more resources to cry foul and shine a skewed light on any conservation efforts made that way, turning them into a bigger fight. Unfortunately that is the nature of the beast. I'm not defending it, but my rose colored glasses regarding public policy and its makers were shattered long before the current idiot entered the Oval office.

Check this out: got a response in writing from Salazar, not sure if it's legit or not.

Dear Jeffrey:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the proposed development on Wolf Creek Pass. I appreciate hearing your thoughts and concerns on this situation.

During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, I asked the Secretary of Agriculture, Mike Johanns, several questions about the United States Forest Service process regarding Wolf Creek. He asked the Chief of the Forest Service, Dale Bosworth, to answer those questions in writing. Chief Bosworth assured me that the public comments on this project would be considered as the Forest Supervisor decides whether to issue the permit for an access road to Mr. McCombs' property. Chief Bosworth also wrote "the decision to be made by the Forest Service is whether and how to provide access to a private inholding and . . .to assess the environmental effects of providing that access."

I will continue to work with Secretary Johanns and Forest Chief Bosworth to ensure the concerns of all Coloradans are considered, and will continue to monitor the situation closely.

Thanks again for contacting me.

Sincerely,

Ken Salazar
United States Senator

The forest service just approved the building of 2 access roads for the development. The end is near. (maybe they'll put in a chair that accesses some good terrain now)