ROBOTN1XON

as a hydrologist who is studying water law in Colorado, I find your water goals to be noble. I do wonder how do you plan to remedy these in instances where water contamination comes as a result of the pipes within a private residence? would you be for a national effort to support upgrading underfunded communities pipes? How much of the GDP do feel is appropriate to address issues of water quality?

have you spoken with, or would you consider speaking to, local municipalities and plumbing experts on action plans? What sort of solutions are you pushing for? would you be for a government contract or contest system for cheap retrofitting solutions?

I have three questions. 1) Do you think the federal government will allow diversion of water for cannabis and hemp from federally funded projects. Currently in states like Colorado, federally funded water projects cannot allow water diversions for anything illegal at the federal level. The Colorado Big Thompson water is not suppose to be used for cannabis, although some people were trying to use industrial classified CBT for hemp. The last I heard is that no CBT water can be used from hemp or cannabis.

2) in Colorado, there is an over production of hemp, and some would also say cannabis, but a lack of processing facilities. From my understanding, the legal implications about interstate transportation of hemp is questionable enough to discourage producers from transporting product across state lines for processing. Although they are willing to transport finished products like CBD oil across state lines. Do you know of any efforts of current legislation that would improve interstate commerce of hemp?
3) how long do you think it will take after federal legalizing cannabis for insurance companies and other entities to allow people with commercial drivers licenses to use cannabis while not on the clock?

can you clarify what they stated? did they say there simply wasn't a problem with city owned pipes? or did they say the private area wasn't an issue? [or did they not fully answer the question]

also, why don't cities/governments advise residents about what type of pipe they should consider installing OR give options to setup an additional filter system where the city line meets the private connection?

how would you propose filters be paid for? At some point local government can only be held responsible for providing water at a pre-determined quality. If cities were able to effectively argue that they provided proper service in courts, who would be footing the bill for all the filters? would people be required to buy them?

It sounds like there may or may not be lead service pipes in your particular town, but in some towns there probably are. Some infrastructure is so old that the people who authorized those decisions are long gone, and made the wrong choice innocently. considering water utilities are essentially self-funded and use long term bonds for future demand projects, can municipal water suppliers even afford to address this situation if they caused it? Could courts even rule against them because of the national economic impacts the ruling would have? it seems more like federal or state level assistance would be needed to fund a solution to this issue. I don't think municipalities are capable of fixing this one fiscally speaking.