The Western Slope’s two congressmen, Manassa Democrat John Salazar and Eldorado Springs Democrat Mark Udall, both said a proposed $700 billion bailout for the faltering financial markets simply did not go far enough to protect taxpayers.

“I take very seriously the warnings about how conditions in the credit markets could affect the overall economy. But, the cost of this bailout was too high and the return far too uncertain for the American families who were being asked to bear the burden,” Udall said in a statement.

The legislation’s failure sparked a record drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average and similar declines in other indexes. It have allowed the U.S. Treasury to buy up bad mortgages and other distressed assets held by commercial banks and other financial entities.

Salazar, whose district includes Grand Junction, said he thought the bill failed to do enough to help homeowners facing foreclosures.

“The bill is also deficient in that it provides no relief to homeowners who desperately want to remain in their homes but need direct assistance,” he said.

Reps. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Fort Morgan., and Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs., also voted against the bill, which died in a 205-228 vote.

The bill’s supporters, including Reps. Tom Tancredo, R-Littleton, and E Perlmutter, D-Golden., said they were discouraged that Congress did not act quickly enough to prevent the financial markets from tanking.

“Our nation faces serious economic challenges that require serious action,”

Congresswoman Diana DeGette, D-Denver, said in a statement Monday. “Doing nothing risks a freeze in our financial markets, further exacerbating the economic meltdown while everyday Americans suffer.

“After the vote today, about a trillion dollars of wealth in our economy evaporated in just a few hours.”

Though the two sides split in their support for the legislation, they agreed that Congress should go back to the negotiating table and hash out a second bill before the House adjourns for the fall.

Schaffer, meanwhile, accused congressional Democrats of being more concerned with voting to recess at the end of the week than passing an energy plan. Agreeing to Schaffer’s challenge, Udall said he would not vote for a recess until an energy bill comes up.

At The Colorado Index, Civil Sense highlights the importance of Mark Udall’s promise and why it will be difficult for him to keep:

It is unlikely that Nancy Pelosi and the Delay, Don’t Drill, Do Nothing Democrats would allow debate on an energy bill before summer recess as this would force vulnerable Democrat House members to vote against their leadership. Time will tell whether or not Mark Udall will have to follow through or renege on his promise to vote against summer recess.

In addition to sitting on their collective hands on expanding domestic energy supply, Mark Udall and the Democratic Congress have failed to pass a single appropriations bill to fund the federal government, to fill numerous judicial vacancies, and to investigate massive corruption uncovered among trial lawyers.

Will Mark Udall keep his promise? Or will he come back to Colorado with an “aw shucks, I tried” that befits his dedication to radical environments over domestic energy solutions?

The Bob Schaffer-Mark Udall debate airs locally in Colorado on 10 PM Sunday on Fox 31.

By Ben Degrow
Schaffer v Udall: 2008 Colorado Senate Battle
July 30, 2008

Democrat Mark Udall defended his alternative-energy plan in a U.S. Senate debate Monday, despite recent polls showing that Republicans are scoring points with calls to increase domestic drilling.

While Republican Bob Schaffer pushed for oil exploration and increased use of renewable energy, Udall said the country needs a new energy policy focused on renewables, nuclear plants and alternative-fuel cars. The Eldorado Springs congressman blasted Schaffer for working for an oil company and labeled him a “Johnny-come-lately” to the renewable energy bandwagon.

The debate was taped for broadcast Sunday on Fox 31.

Schaffer, a former congressman from Fort Collins, defended his record on renewable energy. Although the Congressional Record noted him discussing the topic only once on the House floor in six years, he talked about it more often outside Congress, Schaffer said.

The Republican nominee also continued to advocate expanded drilling in coastal waters and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to free the nation from dependence on foreign oil.

Udall, who has seen a 10-point lead in polls slip to a tie in the past month, fought back by saying the tax breaks Schaffer and others gave to big oil have not stopped - and may even have hastened - recent gasoline price increases.

The Democratic nominee turned most questions, including one on the Iraq war, to a discussion on energy and said afterward that he won’t change the subject no matter what polls say.

“People are feeling the pain, and I’ve got a plan to respond to that pain,” Udall said of high gas prices. “This has been the focus of all 12 years I’ve been in office. It’s been the focus of my career. Why wouldn’t I talk about it?”

In discussing the war, Udall said he has gone twice to Iraq to visit troops while Schaffer has gone only once, to secure an oil deal for his company with the Kurds against State Department wishes.

Schaffer responded that Udall was “untruthful” about the trip to Kurdistan in 2006 to introduce Aspect Energy officials to the Kurds. Unlike Udall, Schaffer said, he supports troop withdrawal based on a checklist of achievements rather than an arbitrary timetable.

Schaffer, meanwhile, accused congressional Democrats of being more concerned with voting to recess at the end of the week than passing an energy plan. Agreeing to Schaffer’s challenge, Udall said he would not vote for a recess until an energy bill comes up.

The debate was the second joint appearance by the men looking to succeed retiring Republican Sen. Wayne Allard.

Want to see the debate?

Watch Rep. Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer duke it out.

* When: 10 p.m. Sunday

* Where: Fox 31

By Ed Sealover
Rocky Mountain News
Tuesday, July 29, 2008

For nearly a decade, city leaders here have wooed the Democrats, hoping to lure their national convention to this often-overlooked town and showcase its new public transit system, bustling downtown and sweeping views of the Rocky Mountains.

Municipal leaders were jubilant when they won the right to hold this year’s event. But the convention is raising questions about whether this perennial booster town has bitten off more than it can chew.

FOR THE RECORD:
Democratic National Convention: An article in Monday’s Section A about problems the Democrats are having raising money for their national convention quoted the executive vice president of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce as saying his organization was going to donate $250,000 to the convention but had to hold back $150,000 to fight ballot initiatives. The group has donated $250,000, but held back an additional $150,000 it had planned to give.

The host committee is as much as $10 million short in fundraising, and financial difficulties have forced it to cancel two dozen parties for delegates. Denver officials are scrambling to deal with the logistical challenges of Barack Obama’s acceptance speech being held at an outdoor stadium instead of in the arena where the rest of the convention will take place. Even special daisies that the city bred partly to show off for the convention are failing to sprout.

Criticism has been so harsh that this month the host committee felt compelled to issue a news release defending its much-mocked catering guidelines, which recommend organic produce and color-coordinated meals and discourage fried food.

“It’s an embarrassment, particularly for the political class,” said Floyd Ciruli, a former chairman of the state Democratic Party who is now an independent pollster unaffiliated with the convention effort. “At this point, everybody’s thinking about the burdens rather than the benefits.”

Local political leaders and the host committee insist everything is fine, and that any bumps along the way will be overshadowed by the attention showered on the city next month.

“That’s a little bit of white noise around the perimeter,” said Mayor John Hickenlooper. “Did we ever dream we’d have a candidate of this historic magnitude? Did we ever dream we’d have a candidate who’d make his acceptance speech in front of 80,000 people and have to turn away another 80,000?”

Nonetheless, at a conference on Western issues last week, Hickenlooper referred to the event as the “blasted convention” and compared it to a summer he spent painting a house for which he was never paid. “If we’d known back then what we know now, we’d never have done it,” he said, before quickly adding, “and what an incredible shame that would have been.”

Last month the host committee said it was $10 million short of its $40-million target, but it now refuses to discuss fundraising totals.

Officials blame several factors: The drawn-out primary battle sapped would-be donors. The economic downturn has hit Denver hard because the city’s relatively modest corporate base includes struggling companies such as Frontier Airlines, which is reorganizing under bankruptcy law protection. And business leaders say attention and money are being diverted by union-led ballot initiatives that they are fighting, measures they insist could destroy their livelihoods.

Tom Clark, executive vice president of the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce, said his organization was going to donate $250,000 to the convention but had to hold back $150,000 to fight the initiatives. “There’s a lot of calls on the money right now,” he said.

Denver leaders say they are determined to meet their goals. “We will find the money and get it done,” Clark said. “When you’re an aspirational city, you don’t walk away from your place on the world stage.”

Since it raised money to lure the transcontinental railroad away from Cheyenne in the 1860s, Denver has tried to will its way to greatness. A hundred years ago it held its last Democratic National Convention to showcase its then-mayor’s attempt to build a European-style “city beautiful” with grand boulevards and Beaux-Arts statues.

In the last decade, Denver has built an immense airport, now the world’s 11th busiest. It revived its faded downtown, now speckled with clubs, restaurants and condos, with a new wing on its art museum designed by renowned architect Daniel Libeskind. It has invested in a $6-billion project to build 119 miles of light rail.

Denver competed unsuccessfully for the 2000 Democratic National Convention, which was held in Los Angeles. The city was the sentimental favorite this year for a Democratic Party eager to highlight its new reach in the West. Hickenlooper vowed the convention would be the most environmentally friendly one yet.

Problems swiftly surfaced, starting with fundraising. The host committee told caterers they should make “every effort” to ensure that each plate consisted of 70% organic food and 50% fruits and vegetables; include nothing fried; and contain at least three of these five colors: red, green, yellow, purple/blue and white.

After caterers complained and the policy was mocked in the media, the host committee put out a defensive news release saying the guidelines were voluntary and fried food would still be available.

“That was not a good start, creating the food police,” said Councilman Charlie Brown.

To add insult to injury, special “Denver daisies,” bred for the city’s 150th anniversary in November and designed to bloom during the convention, are having a hard time growing. Only about a third have blossomed — an issue so serious that the City Council heard a report on it this month.

For their part, many Denver residents, apparently fearful that security measures will paralyze the compact downtown, say they plan to skip town the week of the convention.

Steve Farber, co-chairman of the host committee, denied that the city was in over its head. He said fundraising had picked up since Obama clinched the delegates needed for the nomination last month.

“We had confidence in the city, and I really believe the companies within the city and Colorado have stepped up,” he said.

Ciruli said the convention would probably be a success, especially for Democrats eager to expand out of their base on the coasts.

“The backdrop is still working very well for them,” he said of the national party. “I’m just not sure it’s working very well for Denver.”

By Nicholas Riccardi, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
The Los Angeles Times
July 28, 2008

Times staff writer Mark Z. Barabak contributed to this report.

WRAY - The eastern Colorado wind turbine tapped for the Democratic National Convention’s carbon-offset program has one problem: It doesn’t generate any electricity. Convention organizers are now being questioned for their eagerness to market those credits to delegates.

The DNC has contracted with Vermont-based NativeEnergy to offer delegates “Green challenge” carbon offsets to soften the environmental impact of convention travel. That money is then invested in carbon-free “green” energy sources around the country, including a wind turbine installed this year by the Wray School District RD-2. But a Face The State investigation reveals the district’s turbine has never produced marketable energy due to massive equipment malfunctions.

The school district held a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the wind turbine February 15th. Officials soon discovered, however, that the turbine was incapable of producing its intended output. “We flipped it back off and on about 10 times since then,” said Superintendent Ron Howard. “It has run, it will run, but it won’t ramp itself up to full capacity.”

In the meantime, the project has been touted by Gov. Bill Ritter’s administration as an example of government innovation in clean energy, with district officials still attempting to reassure residents of the technology’s long-term potential. Area residents tell Face The State the blades do turn some days, even though the turbine is not producing electricity. The district Web site reads, “As you note the blades turning evenly in the wind…this ‘dream turned into reality’ is providing an environmentally safe source of power to our community.”

In a feature story in Saturday’s Rocky Mountain News, reporter Jerd Smith claimed that 20 percent of Wray’s power is generated by what it calls “a windmill that toils day and night producing clean electricity.” Smith’s report professed that the Wray project is “at the heart” of the DNC’s carbon-credit program.

The Rocky report also described the school wind turbine as “a project that generates thousands of dollars for the region’s cash-strapped schools,” but provided no financial data regarding any energy sales to date.

Howard says the turbine requires replacement equipment, which is scheduled to be installed this month. “It’s a new technology, so they don’t have the bugs out of it,” he said. “Since there’s so many people watching [the turbine], they might be better served to go to a more reliable model.”

State Sen. Greg Brophy, a Wray Republican, says residents feel let down by town leaders. “Most of the people out here were very excited about it,” he said. “But nobody likes to be misled. The ‘green’ DNC convention is an absolute sham.”

Despite the fact the wind turbine does not produce energy, that hasn’t stopped the district from cashing in on the project. In addition to the carbon credits sold to the DNC and others through NativeEnergy, Howard says the district receives downtime compensation from Americas Wind Energy, Inc., the firm that built the apparatus. “The money that we’re making isn’t necessarily coming from production,” he said.

When asked to quantify those payments, Howard would only describe them as “substantial.” While the details of school district contracts and finances are public information, Howard refused to disclose that information. “I’m not going to tell you how much money we are receiving from AWE while we’re waiting for this thing to run,” he said. Face The State has since requested documents from the district under the Colorado Open Records Act.

Howard is similarly tight lipped on the district’s income from carbon offsets. “I’m also not going to tell you how much we got from the sale of the green tax for green energy,” he said. “That’s all there is to it.”

Face the State Staff Report
7/26/08

WASHINGTON — Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh attacked Sen. Ken Salazar of Colorado today on the oil shale issue, while Democrat Salazar said the debate is not about lowering gas prices but about helping oil companies.

The day after the Bureau of Land Management unveiled preliminary rules for selling oil shale leases in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah, Limbaugh quoted President Bush as saying that shale could provide fuel to meet energy needs for more than 100 years.

“But guess who’s standing in the way,” Limbaugh said. “Sen. Ken Salazar, Democrat, Colorado. “Even with $4 a gallon gasoline Salazar and his fellow Democrats are still preventing America from using our own resources to lower gas prices and create new jobs.”

Limbaugh accused Salazar of running as a moderate in 2004 and then acting as a liberal in office.

“The moral, in case you haven’t figured this out, is that new Democrats don’t exist except when they’re running for office,” Limbaugh said. “In office they’re the same old liberals they’ve always been and they don’t give a rat’s rear end about you or what’s right for the country, only about themselves.”

Salazar, interviewed later on 850 KOA, said that Limbaugh is “spreading falsehoods along with many of the people who want us to essentially give away the public lands of Colorado.”

Colorado controls 80 percent of the oil shale reserves in the entire country, Salazar said. The technology to develop that shale does not yet exist, he said, and there are unanswered questions about how much water it will take, where it will come from, and how many coal-fire plants will need to be built to process the shale.

Moreover, Salazar said, the BLM has said it will be 2015 at the earliest before oil can be extracted from the shale.

“This is not about the development of oil shale today that will help us with gas prices,” Salazar said “What this is about is trying to give millions of acres of land away to the oil companies so they can lock it up forever as part of their reserves.”

In an interview today with The Denver Post, Salazar pinned that strategy on the White House.

“It’s at the end of the day part of President Bush’s agenda and Vice-President Cheney’s agenda to essentially give away as much of the public oil and gas resources as possible during their term in office,” Salazar said.

Salazar put a moratorium into a spending bill last year, which bars the BLM from issuing final regulations. It expires Oct. 1.

A spokesman for Sen. Wayne Allard, a Loveland Republican who opposes the moratorium, said this morning that Salazar would fall 10 votes short if he tried to extend it through a Senate floor vote. Allard’s opposition kept the moratorium out of a spending bill for 2009 when that bill passed out of a committee earlier this month.

But Salazar said that the ban probably will not expire. Instead of passing individual spending bills, Congress is likely to pass what’s called a continuing resolution, which takes the language of most of this year’s current spending bills and rolls them into 2009. His language could be part of that continuing resolution.

Salazar, however, said in an interview with The Denver Post today that he does not have assurances that his language would be included in a continuing resolution.

“But certainly it is something we are going to fight for,” Salazar said.

By Anne C. Mulkern
7/23/08

ROCKY MOUNTAIN NEWS

The committee hosting the Democratic National Convention has used the city’s gas pumps to fill up and apparently avoided paying state and federal fuel taxes.

The practice, which began four months ago, may have ended hours after its disclosure. An aide to Mayor John Hickenlooper released a statement Tuesday evening saying that Denver 2008 Host Committee members would pay market prices for fuel and would also be liable for all applicable taxes.

However, Public Works spokeswoman Christine Downs told City Council members just hours before that host committee members were fueling up at the city pumps. The city does not pay taxes on the fuel for its fleet, and Downs said the host committee would not either.

The disclosure brought immediate scrutiny. Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said the practice “would seem” to be illegal and referred the matter to the state Department of Revenue.

Nonprofits, such as the host committee, are subject to state and federal gasoline taxes, according to the Department of Revenue.

The issue arose during the regular weekly meeting of Hickenlooper and City Council members. Downs requested authorization for a contract so the Public Works Department could be reimbursed by the host committee for use of “fueling facilities, fuel and car washes.”

Downs said the contract with the host committee started in March and that $9,700 in fuel and services had been purchased from the city so far. But the committee has yet to be billed. The city anticipates $466,125 in total revenues from the contract, Downs said.

City Councilman Charlie Brown raised the question of whether the host committee would be paying fuel taxes, and Downs said it wouldn’t.

“There’s something there that just doesn’t seem right to me because, in a sense, you’re saying then that the officials who pass the laws are not willing to live by them,” said Councilwoman Jeanne Faatz.

Hickenlooper said the practice isn’t unique to Denver.

“I do know for a fact that they’re doing the same exact thing in Minneapolis,” Hickenlooper said, referring to the city that along with St. Paul is hosting the Republican National Convention.

But Teresa McFarland, a spokeswoman for the Minneapolis-St. Paul host committee, said its members are getting their gas at public pumps.

“We’re not getting a tax break on fuel,” she said. “That’s not the setup at this end.”

In Colorado, consumers pay 40.4 cents per gallon in state and federal fuel taxes.

“We’re a nonpartisan, nonprofit committee, but certainly, if the city feels that taxes are applicable, we will pay those, too,” said Chris Lopez, spokesman for the host committee. “So we would pay all applicable taxes on any of the fuel.”

The host committee, which is responsible for raising money to put on the convention, is using the city’s pumps “for safety and security reasons,” Lopez said.

“We know the gas is not tainted,” he said. “We use it as a safety and security measure.”

Hickenlooper said GM is “loaning” the host committee vehicles and he expects a large number to be hybrids. It wasn’t clear Tuesday whether host committee members are using those loaners or their personal vehicles.

Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party, said the city’s arrangement with the DNC host committee was “appalling.”

“I’m hoping this is not the first of many stories about how Colorado taxpayers are apparently subsidizing the Democratic convention,” Wadhams said.

After the meeting, Faatz said it was wrong for the DNC host committee to get a tax break.

“I am just troubled by not having the payment of taxes for what I consider to be a privately funded party, and that’s what the host committee is: it’s a private organization,” she said.

“If you’ve got a 14-gallon tank, on the average, that’s about $5.66 that they don’t have to pay for fill up,” Brown said.

Brown also questioned the need for car washes.

It also wasn’t clear Tuesday whether the Department of Revenue will investigate.

“We can’t talk about any individual taxpayer’s circumstance,” said department spokesman Mark Couch. “Tax-exempt organizations are not exempt from fuel taxes, so a nonprofit group is not exempt from fuel taxes. As to the individual circumstance involved here, we’d have to look into it and investigate to make any kind of determination.”

Denis Berckefeldt, spokesman for Denver Auditor Dennis Gallagher, said Hickenlooper’s administration has been guilty in the past of doing business before a contract is executed.

“Is it unusual that it happens?” he asked. “No, because they do stuff like this. Do we like it? No.”

In January 2006, Gallagher complained to Hickenlooper in a letter about the “ongoing problem related to work being performed on behalf of the city before a contract for that work has been fully executed and properly signed.”

At that time, Gallagher wrote, an examination of 999 contracts found that in 790 cases - 79 percent - work began before the contracts were “fully executed.”

“We would have a problem with this because they’re clearly selling fuel to the host committee without a fully executed contract,” Berckefeldt said. “We have a real serious issue at the auditor’s office with the city doing business with anyone without a contract.”

by Daniel J. Chaconand Kevin Vaughan
7/22/08

— Montrose consumers got good news Tuesday when the city announced it is chopping its sales tax rate one-half of a percentage point.

The reduction to 3 percent fulfilled a promise the city made to voters in 2002 when they approved a tax increase for school construction. The five-year tax yielded $12 million that was paired with a school district property tax bond of $11 million.

With the $23 million, the school district built Johnson Elementary school for 500 students and added classrooms to Montrose High School, Olathe Middle/High School and four elementary schools. The money also paid for renovation and improvements to several other schools, according to a news release from the city and the school district.

Because the projects were completed under budget and ahead of schedule, there is money left to pay for extensive remodeling at Pomona Elementary School, adding classrooms at Columbine Middle School and improvements to the school district office, according to the news release.

The tax to allow the school building improvements began when a residents group called “It’s About Pride” started working on a plan to improve schools in 2000, according to the release.

By BEVERLY CORBELL
7/22/08

Regional Transportation District officials are wrestling with the difficult task of developing strategies and tactics needed to deal with the nearly $2 billion increase in estimated cost to complete the FasTracks program by 2017.

RTD introduced the FasTracks plans in late 2003. The proposal asked voter approval for a sales-tax increase of 0.4 cents to make it possible to pay for a 12-year mass transit project that would add 119 miles of light rail and commuter rail lines, 18 miles of bus rapid transit service and expanded bus service, including suburb-to-suburb connections.

Voters approved the tax increase in November 2004 for a project scheduled to be built at a cost of $4.7 billion. However, cost estimates increased dramatically with the skyrocketing increase in fuel and the fact construction material prices have increased by more than 30 percent since then.

Also, the slow economy dropped the sales-tax collections well below estimates. The two factors combined to create a budget problem for FasTracks.

“We are victims of the skyrocketing cost of fuel and construction materials and the depressed economy that has people putting money in the gas tank instead of shopping so sales tax revenues are down,” said Cal Marsella, RTD director. “There has been talk about looking at ways to increase revenues, extending the time to complete the project or cutting the scope of some of the lines. None of those are solutions we want to accept. So, we are trying to develop a series of scenarios to present at the annual project evaluation in August.

“We want to establish priorities for each option and describe the impact each option might have. But the RTD board of directors unanimously endorse building FasTracks as designed and completing the projects on time. Now, we have to achieve those goals.”

Marsella said major factors remain unresolved, including the cost of buying or leasing right-of-way from the railroads for the commuter rail lines, completion of public-private partnerships and determining costs for construction materials.

“The resolution of those issues will have a major impact on the budget,” Marsella said. “We also hope to increase revenues through fare increases, re-evaluation of our pass programs and a plan to generate parking revenues. All those elements figure into how we will deal with the FasTracks budget issue.”

O’Neil Quinlin, RTD board representative from the area, said the budget challenge has been steadily building because of two major factors — increased costs and lower-than-expected revenues.

“I feel now we as a board need to make strategic decisions and make them soon,” he said. “We know going into the process there aren’t any good options or easy solutions. All these will be really tough decision that have an impact on people’s lives. Personally, I don’t know how this challenge will turn out.”

FasTracks projects include extending the Southwest Corridor south into Highlands Ranch and the Southeast Corridor south to Sky Ridge Medical Center. However, those two extensions are part of the final years of the project and scheduled to be completed until 2017. RTD recently purchased land from the City of Englewood on Lucent Boulevard, the planned location of the Highlands Ranch station.

Several RTD riders said they want to see FasTracks completed as planned and on time but at least two of them had different opinions of the best way to deal with the issues.

Conrad Pennington, local resident, said while he wouldn’t relish the idea, he’s willing to vote to approve paying more in sales taxes to get FasTracks up and running as planned.

“I live in Highlands Ranch and the Lucent station would be a great help to me in my commute,” he said as he waited on the platform at Mineral Station. “I work downtown but frequently have to drive to work because I have to go to Golden and to Boulder. If FasTracks is completed as planned, I could ride light rail to both areas and never have to drive downtown.”

But Sandra Blum disagrees.

“I want to see all the new lines completed on time but I don’t want to pay more or higher fares to get that done,” the Lone Tree woman said as she waited for the train at the Dry Creek station. “I voted for FasTracks and I did it partially because I felt there was promise to build this with the money provided and get it completed as scheduled. I know about rising prices. I see it every day. But RTD needs to devise a solution to get FasTracks built without taking more money out of our pockets.”

By Tom Munds
7/22/08

Unemployment stood at 5.1% in June, up from 4.9% in May

Colorado’s unemployment rate ticked up to 5.1 percent in June from 4.9 percent in May. It’s the highest rate since September 2005.

The number is also significantly worse than one year ago, when Colorado unemployment was 3.7 percent.

The Colorado Department of Labor and Employment notes that June is generally a month of rising unemployment throughout Colorado as student workers enter the job market. The department said that pattern held true as 49 of Colorado’s 64 counties recorded higher unemployment rates.

Government job-trackers at the state and federal level release unemployment rates, which are based on surveys of workers as well as a separate survey of employers that yields the official job-creation numbers.

Colorado had 2,389,400 jobs in June, 1.34 percent above June 2007 numbers, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. The year-over-year rate of growth has slowed in eight of the past nine months, dating back to October. In September 2007, the number of Colorado jobs was 2.49 percent higher than September 2006, and job growth remained above 2 percent until March.

“Although employment growth has been positive, it has been too modest to absorb the state’s expanding labor force,” Donald J. Mares, executive director of the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, said in a statement.

The state labor department said the largest contributor to job growth has been the government sector, which showed a gain of 10,200 jobs and accounted for roughly one-third of net job gains since last June.

Education and health services gained 9,700 positions, while professional and business services, trade, transportation and utilities, and leisure and hospitality each added more than 6,000 new workers since last June. Natural resources and mining employment rose 3,200, and other services trended up 1,800.

Two industries susceptible to the turmoil in the housing and credit markets - construction and financial services - fell 5,000 and 1,700, respectively, over the past year. Manufacturing, down 4,800, and information services, off 1,700, also shed jobs in the past 12 months.

Colorado’s best and worst

Counties with lowest June unemployment rates: * Yuma 2.8 percent

* Cheyenne 2.8 percent

Counties with highest June unemployment rates: * Costilla 9.2 percent

* Conejos 8.3 percent

Published in the Rocky Mountain News
by David Milstead
July 18, 2008