The Facts

Kirk Hartley

Ascendigo is not interested "in the numbers" **open for dialogue and debate**. “We’re not interested in the numbers, we’re interested in mitigation” – Dan Richardson, COO of Ascendigo, May 1st 2021

There are some on this forum who want to parrot Ascendigo’s propaganda and then request that there not be any dialogue or debate on a public forum designed specifically for dialogue and debate.

The supporters of welcome dialogue and debate because we are on the side of right, we are on the side of the facts. Ascendigo, along with their professional PR team, has done a wonderful job manipulating the public with false information and creating shills for their cause. This is some of what Ascendigo doesn’t want you to know. These facts are backed up with data and documentation obtained by Because we are interested in the numbers.

Fact: Number Games: Ascendigo is using a false equivalency with the “alternative subdivision”. Manipulating people into thinking the commercial Camp will be less impactful. The approved number of homesites on that land is 15, NOT 21. Ascendigo keeps pushing that number even though they know it’s wrong and have admitted that it is wrong in public when pushed. All of Ascendigo’s studies included with the application use the erroneous number of homes in the alternative subdivision, rendering them useless. GARCO is currently looking into this.

Fact: Water: Ascendigo used GARCO’s criteria when measuring water use for their fantasy alternative subdivision. Then switched to an obscure national standard when measuring water use for their Camp. – Purposeful manipulation. A water engineering group hired by showed the fully developed subdivision of 15 homes, using the GARCO criteria for water usage, would use less water than Ascendigo Ranch.

Fact: Water: When Ascendigo ran their well pump study, it took 8 days for the aquifer to return to 89% of normal. This should concern everyone who lives in MOH

Fact: Traffic: In a referral letter obtained by CORA request, Garfield County Road and Bridge expressed concerns that parts of Ascendigo’s traffic study is inadequate and meaningless because they used a single day(1 day) as the criteria for traffic measurement. instead of the standard 7 days.

Fact: Traffic: The traffic numbers in Ascendigo’s study are inflated to make their Ranch seem less impactful than it is. -Purposeful Manipulation. The inflated numbers are completely out of line with The Federal Bureau of Transportations estimates for the area and contradict Ascendigo’s own numbers from its own study.

What you will see in the coming days/weeks is GARCO request and extension/continuation on this matter. This is an indication that they need clarification and more time to unravel the magical math, misinformation and “typos” throughout this 700+ page “limited impact” (Ha!) application.

Don’t be fooled by the professional PR machine!

Posted in General to 8 neighborhoods

6 Neighbors