U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 27, 2007 04:44 PM UTC

Dems: GOP Roan "Windfall" Numbers Bogus

  • 42 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the Denver Post reports:

A proposal by statehouse Republicans to channel revenue from the Roan Plateau into a fund for higher education overestimates the amount of money it will bring in, an expert on petroleum accounting said Thursday.

Sen. Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, and Rep. Al White, R-Winter Park, last month said the state could reap a $1 billion windfall from bonus payments that drilling companies would pay to access federal land on the Roan Plateau in western Colorado.

But the numbers are far too high, according to Mary Ellen Denomy, an accountant who said she researched recent lease deals in the area at the request of some statehouse Democrats.

Denomy said the state can expect to collect just $5.8 million to $8.1 million in bonus payments from leases to drill on the Roan, which is northwest of Interstate 70 between Rifle and Parachute.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management announced last month that it would allow energy development on the Roan, prompting Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter to ask for a delay. Currently, about 52,000 acres would be available for development.

Penry dismissed Denomy’s analysis as a politically motivated attack on his proposal…

Maybe it is, but Penry has some serious explaining to do, as the Post continues:

Penry said his numbers – backed by the oil and gas industry – show that the land on the Roan Plateau could command bonus payments of $40,000 an acre. Penry cited two nearby deals that raised between $43,000 and $50,000 an acre.

“To suggest that one of the largest proven gas fields in the hemisphere is going to draw a couple hundred bucks an acre is just totally absurd,” Penry said.

Denomy analyzed 19 transactions involving leases on land controlled by the Bureau of Land Management. Based on her analysis of 20,661 acres of land on the plateau or adjacent to it, the average bonus payment was $220 an acre.

“Show me where the BLM has leased any property for $40,000 an acre,” Denomy said. “Not anywhere in our state.”

The $40,000-an-acre deal was between two private companies and consisted of land that was already developed with roads and pipelines. It was a proven natural-gas field, Denomy said.

Leases on the Roan will probably yield far less money, in part because the land isn’t yet developed and partly because of restrictions the government has placed on drilling in the area, Denomy said.

If these numbers are accurate, the state won’t receive anywhere near the “nearly $1 billion” Penry and cosponsor Rep. Al White claimed it would. Their proposal, meant to split fierce opposition to drilling on the Roan Plateau by routing proceeds to other liberal priorities like education, is looking increasingly like a swindle based on wildly unrealistic projections.

At any rate, this rebuttal will harden opposition to Penry’s plan among undecided Democrats, which is all it will take to render the proposal DOA when the legislature reconvenes next January.

Tweet
Share

Comments

42 thoughts on “Dems: GOP Roan “Windfall” Numbers Bogus”

  1. That pretty much tells us all we need to know about the reliability of those numbers.  Surely the oil and gas industry would never lie to get what it wants now would it?  Yeah, right.

    1. Once again this shows that little Josh Penry has a lot to learn yet. He’s like the kid in the candy throwing a fit becuase the grown-ups tell him it’s going to cost too much to buy everything.

      Hey Josh, perhaps you should slow down on how much you consume. You’re get rich-quick scheme, is just that… a scheme. You’re going to hurt our state more than help with great ideas like this one.

      1. Earmarking energy production funds in order to educate our children is going to hurt our state?!

        Only someone with balls as blue as Blue’s could have such convoluted thinking. I am sure the average Colorado resident, when faced with the difficult decision of saving sage brush or educating their child, would chose the former.

    2. It has taken a group of paid enviros this long to come up with what ultimatley ammounts to a weak and hollow attack on a reasonable idea?!

      First of all, it is common knowledge that Marathon Oil paid $43,000 for leases right next to the Roan. And what’s more? These properties had ZERO pipelines or infrastructure. Come on guys! Find something better to do on a friday night. And also ask the Gay and Lesbian Fund, The Ben and Jerry’s Foundation and all the other foundation slush funds who finance your efforts to pay you more.

        1. “A non-partisan oil and gas expert” …

          you mean, someone, like, say, Ricky Alward. “Giggle”

          I was talking to my neighbors and they sure feel better now that Rich “The Scientist” “Expert” Alward is protecting our water and saving The Roan.

          You folks over-use words like “Expert”

          If Western Colorado Congress doesnt have their fingers prints on this stuff then Ward Churchill is a good professor.

        2. Ask and ye shall recieve.

          http://www.marathon….

          Why the Hell wasn’t this one in their comp sales?  Now I remember.  BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE SCREWED UP THE ENTIRE FRAUDULENT EXERCISE.

          That’s like an appraiser forgetting to comp the same house that sold right next door last year.  I will bet my watch that this phony appraiser was paid by the environmentalists

          1. The lease wasn’t included because it wasn’t a BLM lease, per the linked Denver Post article.

            The lease in question is in a developed area.  The area right next to it – according to the fact sheet you linked to – is already being developed.  The WIC is deploying massive piplines to the area already.  It is in the middle of a proven reserve.

            But thanks for the (limited) info.

          2. I agree, if you buy proven reserves in the middle of a developed area from another private company, it costs a lot more.

            You’ve outsmarted yourself — this report was on BLM leases, but Penry fraudulently based his estimate on private market rates for known resources. A completely different situation. And to cap it off you link us to a glossy from them that says which private company they bought it from and extolling the fact that it’s “flanked by adjecent production.” Thanks for clarifying, that’s how we do this in school. Dumbfuck.

            3. In case you hadn’t heard amidst your frolics in the forest, THE ROAN PLATEAU IS THE MOST PROVEN NATURAL GAS DEPOSIT IN THE UNITED STATES! Why the hell do you think it was at one time a strategic reserve of national importance? In fact, the gas reserves identified beneath the Roan are one of the reasons the Navy set the area aside as an energy reserve in the first place!!!

              I assume by the lack of historical perspective that all of the enviro posts are from folks in their 20s. I was actually involved in regional politics of the Roan when Clinton and others set it aside for gas development.

              The Roan Plateau (just in case you haven’t been up there-which I assume is the case) is full of roads, private property and existing gas wells. Before you spout of more enviro-spatter you should take a day and go up there and see that the Roan is just as developed as the areas around it. The existing roads and access coupled with the largest gas deposit in North America is why it must be developed.

              Ok. So you are all hung up on the $1 Billion dollar number. Fine. Let’s cut it in half. $500 million is not chump change.

              1. I have hunted on the roan. it is not developed.  The base is developed but the top isn’t.  if O&G wants to cough up $500m upfront we can talk, but it wont be $500m so O&G would never do it.

  3. I’m shocked, I tell you, shocked. 

    Next thing you know, an unbiased investigator will be telling us that Alberto “Torquemada” Gonzales, Dick “The  Dark Side” Cheney, and George “The Moron” Bush have lied, too!

    1. So Penry says this will net $1 billion dollars; an accountant says that overstates the case not just by a little, but by ONE HUNDRED TIMES; and… Penry claims partisan attack and that’s it?

      Wow, what a world we live in.  It’s not like the facts of the situation are anything like in that much doubt.  The problem here is that media is more interested in reporting “both” sides than in saying what’s true; partisanship has become cover for blatant lies.  And people have come to expect it, so it’s not surprising.

      I wish we lived in a world where truth mattered more than who’s in what party.

      1. …of the cons and the fundies over the last 30 years has been to implant this idea of “equal time” presenting theories and facts.  The populace, in its inherent sense of fair play, sees nothing wrong with that.  However, without some objective basis that the Flying Spaghetti Monster http://www.venganza….  didn’t create, er, creation, it doesn’t deserve a place at the table of dialogue. 

        Likewise, numbers pulled out of the ample ass of Exxon’s Lee Raymond should be viewed with great suspicion. It’s not like the oil industry doesn’t have an agenda or something.  I doubt if Denomy does.

        1. The Swift boaters were able to appear on legitimate news venues as deserving of equal credibility with Kerry when every single piece of available documentation clearly showed they were pushing completely unfounded lies( Kerry’s initials appeared on report writing him up for a medal-they didn’t.  The name or initials of the doctor who claimed to have examined him and judged him undeserving of his purple hearts appears on no medical records.  Most of the swift boaters who signed the petition against him never were anywhere near him in Vietnam.  Many weren’t even in country during the same time period, yet it was implied they were witnesses. Most important, Junior Lieutenants don’t get silver stars just by penning a few lies about themselves and all close eye witnesses to both bronze and silver star incidents back the written reports) while all documentation backed the legitimacy of Kerry’s heroism. 

          These were just Bush supporters who were mad at Kerry for protesting the war on his return, something he certainly earned the right to do.  But the media treated it like he said-he said.  What really offends and saddens my Swift Boat Vet husband, who refused to sign on, is that these bozos and the media managed to make “swiftboating” a term that stands for underhanded smear tactics. He thinks that’s a damn shame.  Their “proof” should have been vetted before they were ever allowed to appear on any legitimate news program as credible sources.

          1. Thank your husband for his service and convey my sympathy for anything associated with that service being turned into a dirty word.

            I will try to refrain from using it to describe smear tactics.

      2. there is no single, uncontested “truth,” or means of determining the truth, to which all can be referred. In the social sciences, which one might consider the final bastion of expertise to which to defer, weak theories with large followings can and often do prevail over stronger theories with smaller followings. Economists and biologists traditionally differ dramatically over whether environmental and natural resource problems pose urgent threats to humanity, or will generally be resolved by organic economic responses. There is a competition over defining the truth that underlies all other conflicts and competitions in the political sphere. You may know, and I may know, which version is correct in any given instance, but as this blog proves, what you know and what I know may at times be diametrically opposed. It’s not enough to say that we should defer to the truth rather than grant equal time. We must first establish the rules by which the truth is determined, and, even then, we will be stuck with the fact that the truth will remain a political football.

        1. even constructs like social, economic, and political matters there are still objective facts on which those constructs are built.

          Those facts can be improperly perceived, characterized or recorded leading to error, but the underlying facts are still objective.  If the observation of the objective facts is too imperfect, everything else is suspect.

          I agree that interpreting the facts is subjective and not amenable to characterizing as true or not. Subjective analysis of objective fact can only be characterized as more or less logical.

          In the case of Kerry and questions about his comabat record there were material misrepresentations of objective facts made by those texas dirtbags, any subjective conclusions based on those “bad” facts are not worth a bag of shit and the media should treat them is such.

          If the facts were acurate, but the subjective conclusions were illogical, the situation would be slightly different.

          1. as they were in the Kerry case. I agree with you that the overwhelming probability, from where I (and apparently you) stand, is that the allegations against him were fabricated for political reasons. But, truth is, I wasn’t there, and there is no universally accepted objective chronicle of the facts (had there been, there would have been no opportunity to muddy the waters, as was done). My point isn’t that objective truth does not exist (though there is a legitimate discussion to be had on that matter, not just eminating from the flaky post-modernists, but also from the consumately non-flaky quantum physicists); my point is that it is rarely definatively verifiable.

            Even for facts that are generally uncontested, the truth of the matter is based on social convention, not on access to some absolute and indisputable verification. I accept that the world is round, but, even though I have actually circumnavigated it, I can not absolutely verify that it is round. I accept it on faith. This may be a bit beyond the purvue of the present discussion, but it makes a good starting place for laying out the conceptual framework you need to keep in mind: Nothing is certain. Each of us may, a la “The Matrix,” be dreaming everything other than our own existance. Arguably, that is verified by “cogito ergo sum.” All else is open to debate (though people who actually subject all else to debate are tedious time-wasters).

            I’m all for condemning Holocaust deniers, and, in general, accepting most mainstream narratives about historical and scientific facts. But the more contested a fact-set is, the less legitimate any claim to indisputability, and no fact, as I argued above, has any absolute claim to indisputability (with, as said, the possible exception of one’s own existance). It may be annoying, it may be inconvenient, it may put relatively arbitrary claims on a more equal footing with better evidenced claims, but in the end, all one can do is present the evidence and insist that that is your authority.

            And that’s the fact of the matter!

    2. But Josh is personally libel for any shortfall from the billion predicted from the reliable O&G numbers.

      Either that or don’t drill on the Roan.  At least not until we get some reliable data on the impact from drilling.  O&G numbers don’t count.

      1. Or, even better (since Josh probably doesn’t have $1 billion to cover the debt), the O&G companies that want to lease on the Roan can simply pay Colorado the billion, and Colorado can in return give those companies the right to receive its share of the money from the BLM.  Even trade, right?

        1. If they are so confident of those numbers, over say, a 20 year life span of the project, just divvy it up and send it to the treasury.

          Oh, and don’t forget to add the inflationary increase.  Twenty years from now a billion just won’t be what it is today.

          1. Ok. So you all seem to be laughing amongst yourselves preaching to the bongo circle choir, but the reality is whether it’s $750 million or $1.5 Billion, the Roan stands to produce significant dollars for higher ed. And I would think the Roan is a better place to get that money than asking for a tax increase

            1. A bongo circle jerk off?  Well, it’s a creative term and concept, although I have no idea what it means or how it connects to a debate on the validity of certain numbers. 

              Come on, fess up…are you another login for Aspinall Democrat?  Like him, blows in here from nowhere with one topic in mind, and it happens to be the Roan.

              You are certainly entitled to your opinions and your posts here, but you’ll get a lot more respect if you have real facts and don’t just jump from post to post to rebut each one. 

              Seems like Ms. Doheny is a very respected expert in this field.  She’s a CPA and expert witness on oil revenues.  http://www.google.co…

              Now, who are you again?

    1. Someone call the Sierra Club and tell them they have a new member!
      http://www.colorados…

      Penry’s use of $1billion dollar windfall is almost as comical as Dr. Evil holding the world ransom with his laser beam.

      Can Senators wear birkenstocks on the Senate floor?

    2. Someone call the Sierra Club and tell them they have a new member!
      http://www.colorados…

      Penry’s use of $1billion dollar windfall is almost as comical as Dr. Evil holding the world ransom with his laser beam.

      Can Senators wear birkenstocks on the Senate floor?

  5. the state should have a specific plan for what to do with the money from Roan and all O&G activities for that matter. Right now the money the state gets from severance is too ripe for the politician’s picking for little pet projects.

    1. Funding education in Colorado through severance tax monies is hairbrained and short shighted, not to mention just plain stupid.  Why would the Penry/White (and there are plenty of Dems who think this way as well) wish to tie an unpredicatable, fluctuating funding stream to CO education?!

      Last year there was barely enough severance tax dollars to fund the existing legislative mandates for the funding, i.e. the fund is tapped out.

      I’m not against more drilling and more exploration, but I am strongly against funding education with this money.  Another example of myopic fiscal policy.

      1. With every attempt to bring a lottery into every state, the powers behind it come up with a “mother, home, and apple pie” funding beneficiary.  What they are really doing, of course, is selling all of their computers, software, and tickets.  Think of all those terminals in every store that has them.

        Put the money into education?  Why, how can you be against such a noble cause?  (Even if we wouldn’t fund it through taxes…) 

        You are right about their Trojan horse.

        1. Do we put the money? We already have loads of money coming in from O&G, and I would be open to suggestions but it seems a lot of Dems (and politicians in general) in Denver are more content to use it as a pet project fund. No long term vision, which is similar to other states (WY sets some aside, but they spend a ton of it too considering how little their state will have to offer after O&G development is done).

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

161 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!