I’m psyched to see Xconomy launch their Boulder/Denver edition.

Bob Buderi, Xconomy’s CEO, talks about how it came together in his post Announcing Xconomy Boulder/Denver—7th Region in Our Network. Boulder/Denver joins the other six regions – Boston, Detroit, New York, San Diego, San Francisco, and Seattle – and is now part of the broad and expanding coverage that Xconomy is providing on business, life sciences, and technology news.

I’m especially glad that Xconomy hired Michael Davidson as the Boulder/Denver editor. I’ve known Michael for a number of years and have always found his writing and reporting to be insightful, detailed, and thorough. Of all the local tech writers, I think he’s the best and I’m glad he’s leading the charge here for Xconomy.

When this project started it was originally Xconomy Boulder. David Cohen and I quickly realized that a Boulder/Denver edition was much stronger and enlisted several Denver-based friends like Eric Mitisek and Bart Lorang (who lives in Boulder but has his office in Denver) to help rally some Denver-based entrepreneurs to help make this happen. One of our original goals with Startup Colorado when we launched it a a year and a half ago was to more effectively link the Boulder, Denver, Fort Collins, and Colorad Springs startup communities. This is another effort to that end.

There first few articles are up, including:

• Telling the Story of Colorado Innovation, from Molecules to the Moon
• Scaling the Peak: Denver Out to Follow Boulder’s Entrepreneurial Ascent
• Boulder and Denver, a Mile High Sibling Rivalry (guest post by Scott Yates of BlogMutt)

There’s a lot more coming. I hope you make Xconomy a daily read. If you are interested in supporting the effort, just drop me a note and I’ll connect you with the right people.

UberDenver and Uber CEO Travis Kalanick are hosting a rally at Galvanize after the Colorado Public Utilities Commission holds a public hearing on proposed rules changes that could shut UberDenver down.

I’ve had a number of private conversations since I wrote my post The Colorado PUC Trying to Shut Down UberDenver. I continue to think the whole situation is insane especially given our state government’s strong position on advancing innovation in Colorado. The PUC’s behavior is clearly protectionist, anti-innovation, and undermines many of the efforts of entrepreneurs in Colorado to advance and amplify innovation here.

Apparently, the FTC agrees. I just read the FTC comments on the proposed rule changes and they do a very direct job of addressing 6001(ff), 6301(a), and 6309(d) which are the things I called out in my original blog post on 1/30/13. The punch line from the FTC memo is “FTC staff is concerned that these three proposed changes may significantly impair competition in passenger vehicle transportation services, including innovative methods of competition enabled by new software applications (“applications”) that allow consumers to arrange and pay for services in new ways that they might prefer, and thus harm consumers.”

Given that the PUC’s stated mission (on their website) is to “serve the public interest by effectively regulating utilities and facilities so that the people of Colorado receive safe, reliable, and reasonably-priced services consistent with the economic, environmental and social values of our state” I’m hopeful the PUC comes to its senses and serves the public interest in this case, rather than try to create new rules that protect entrenched and incubent companies.

I’ve been told in the private conversations that I’ve had that this will be resolved soon in a way that makes sense. Until then, I continue to encourage anyone in Colorado who is pro-innovation to support Uber’s efforts here and, if you are around Monday, head down to Galvanize between 6pm and 9pm for an UberRally.

Related articles

• FTC staff says PUC rule proposals in Uber case could “harm consumers”
• The Colorado PUC Trying to Shut Down UberDenver – Feld Thoughts
• Denver PUC is being Uber-Annoying
• Colorado PUC Trying to Shut Down UberDenver!
• Amid success with California regulators, Uber faces potential shutdown in Colorado
• Carroll: Colorado vs. Uber and consumer choice

Xconomy is coming to Colorado – specifically Boulder and Denver. They are looking for a writer for the Colorado beat. See the request below.

As Xconomy moves forward in Boulder, Denver, and beyond, we’re going to need someone in the Front Range with the right mix of enthusiasm, creativity, versatility, knowledge, and who also happens to be a top-notch writer. The job will probably be part-time at first, hopefully building quickly to full time as we build our business in Colorado. Our ideal candidate will be a resourceful researcher and fearless interviewer, with the ability to write swiftly and the experience to produce breaking business news stories, longer features, profiles, and bloggy posts on a daily schedule.

We want someone who can work independently, but in close coordination with the team at Xconomy. (You can learn more about us here.) We also give high marks for a sense of humor, and those who show a talent for Web publishing tools and social media.

If this sounds like you, write us at jobs@xconomy.com. Tell us about yourself, your knowledge of the Colorado innovation scene, and why you think you’d be a great fit with Xconomy—and don’t forget a resume and clips.

If this is you, send a note right now to jobs@xconomy.com.

Related articles

• Help Bring Xconomy to Boulder/Denver
• Bring Xconomy to Boulder
• An Xconomy Experiment in Crowdfunding, Colorado Style

I’ve been a huge fan of Xconomy since its debut several years ago. It’s been a refreshing resource for a bunch of startup communities, including Boston (where it started) and Seattle. Over time they’ve added New York, Detroit, San Francisco, and San Diego and are now considering expanding to Boulder / Denver (I encouraged them to combine both as each city is on fire and there’s no reason not to link them together at this point.)

We (my partners and I at Foundry Group and David Cohen at TechStars) are helping them get enough initial sponsors to bring on a full time writer in the Boulder / Denver area. The sign up for the Bring Xconomy to Boulder/Denver page has all the details.

Companies who have already signed up include Application Experts, Foundry Group, FullContact, GoSpotCheck, Gnip, Linksmart, Orbotix, PaySimple, PivotDesk, Precog, Rally Software, SendGrid, Simple Energy, SnapEngage, Standing Cloud, Swiftpage, Sympoz, and TechStars.

Come join us, sign up as a founding sponsor, and help get a great new resource covering the activity in our startup community.

I’m a huge supporter of CU and CU Boulder in particular. While it’s not my alma mater, I’ve probably contributed as much or more time and money as I have to MIT, where I spent seven years. Amy and I strongly support three institutions of higher education – MIT, Wellesley (where she went to school), and CU Boulder.

I was shocked and stunned to get an email from the CU President Bruce Benson yesterday. Here are the first few paragraphs, on the CU President letterhead.

“When Colorado voters in November passed Amendment 64, which legalized small amounts of marijuana for personal use, it led to a number of questions. Most uncertainty surrounds the conflict between the new state law and federal law, under which marijuana remains illegal. Amendment 64 will be signed into law in January and take effect in January 2014.

But for the University of Colorado, the issue is clear. Marijuana threatens to cost the university nearly a billion dollars annually in federal revenue, money we can ill afford to lose.

I was personally opposed to Amendment 64 and worked on my own time to defeat it. But it passed and CU, like many entities, is working to determine the implications.

The glaring practical problem is that we stand to lose significant federal funding. CU must comply with the federal Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act, which compels us to ban illicit drugs from campus. Our campuses bring in more than $800 million in federal research funds, not to mention nearly an additional $100 million in funding for student financial aid. The loss of that funding would have substantial ripple effects on our students and our state. CU contributes $5.3 billion to Colorado’s economy annually, a good portion of it derived from our research.”

Now, independent of your view on the legalization of marijuana, my immediate reaction was that this doesn’t make any sense to me. Last night at dinner, I asked Amy, who is on the Wellesley College board, what she thought. We talked about it for a while and agreed that it seemed extremely inappropriate for Benson to be using his role as CU President to advocate his personal position on this, especially in the context of a threat of losing a billion dollars of federal funding. Neither of us knew the exact rules here, but it just didn’t sound right to me.

This morning, I saw a response from Congressman Jared Polis – our local congressman, a longtime friend of mine and very successful entrepreneur.  Jared’s post was clear and unambiguous - CU Federal Funding Unaffected by Amendment 64: Benson’s Statement Alarmist and Irresponsible.

“The University of Colorado is not in jeopardy of losing a single dime of federal funding due to Amendment 64. President Benson has allowed his personal opposition to Amendment 64 to compromise his responsibility to the university by spreading an alarmist claim that has no basis in fact.

“The legality of marijuana in Colorado tomorrow will not impact CU any more than the legality of alcohol does today. The federal Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act requires universities to adopt and implement drug prevention programs to prevent the unlawful possession, use, or distribution of illicit drugs or alcohol by students and employees on school premises or as part of any of its activities. The University’s alcohol and drug policy bans the use of alcohol and marijuana on campus and satisfies the federal requirement.

“I will not stand by and allow the reputation of the University of Colorado to be sullied by the non-existent threat of losing one billion dollars. As the federal representative the University of Colorado at Boulder, I want to reassure parents, students, and faculty that CU is not in danger of losing any federal funding due to Amendment 64. I call upon President Benson to immediately retract his message and clarify that the University is not in danger of losing any federal funds due to the passage of Amendment 64.”

I respect Benson’s personal position, but I’m offended that he’d use his position the way he just did. Jared is right – Benson owes the members of the CU community a retraction.