U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(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) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

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
March 28, 2017 11:40 AM UTC

Setbacks From Schools: The No-Brainer That Somehow Isn't

  • 13 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Fracking near a high school in Greeley, Colorado.

As the Longmont Times-Call’s John Fryar reports, a bill making its way through the Democratic-controlled House on its way to its all-but-certain death in the Colorado Senate–and probably vetoed by Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper in the unlikely event it did not die in the Senate–serves as another head-scratching teachable moment in the politics of energy development in Colorado:

State Rep. Mike Foote’s proposal to require that any future oil and gas wells be located at least 1,000 feet away from schools’ and child care centers’ property lines is headed for debate by the full Colorado House of Representatives after clearing a committee vote on Thursday night…

Current Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission regulations specify that oil and gas wells must be located at least 1,000 feet away from a school building.

Foote’s bill would expand that setback by requiring that wells and related oil and gas facilities be no closer than 1,000 feet to the school’s or child care center’s property line — an additional distance he and supporters of the proposed law say would protect people on playgrounds and athletic fields as well as the students and teachers inside modular classroom buildings on school campuses.

For the overwhelming majority of Coloradans not in the employ of the energy industry or one of its various supporting businesses, the idea that oil and gas drilling operations can occur so close to any part of a school campus is fairly surprising. The situation illustrated vividly in Greeley of a large drill site immediately adjacent to the local high school’s football field (above) isn’t part of most suburban Coloradans’ family experience yet, but it could be in their future. Keeping drilling operations a minimum distance from the property line of a school ensures that students can use the entire property safely. From any reasonable point of view, this should be a no-brainer. In fact, most non-“energy literate” Coloradans are surprised to learn it’s not already the case.

But like we said, the bill is almost certain to die, moving through the House on party lines:

Foote said in a Friday interview that more than 70 people testified in support of his bill on Thursday night and about 15 — opponents who he said were primarily lobbyists and representatives of the oil and gas industry — spoke against it.

“It’s really too bad that the industry locked down on such a reasonable proposal,” Foote said. [Pols emphasis]

In the GOP-controlled Colorado Senate, it’s more or less axiomatic that if the Colorado Oil and Gas Association opposes a bill, the bill dies. This has been the case for as long as Republicans have been in control of the Senate, and the seamless transition of former Senate President Bill Cadman to his new lobbyist government affairs position at Whiting Petroleum surprised absolutely no one. And yes, the Democratic governor of our state has himself proven to be highly accommodating to energy development, to the point of significantly dividing the local Democratic coalition on the issue.

The point we’re making here is that at eventually, this conflict is going to result in a groundswell backlash in Colorado politics–and potentially some realignment among local officials based on their stand either with the energy industry or residential communities. The confrontation between voters concerned about oil and gas development in their neighborhoods and the energy industry’s powerful political establishment was delayed by the passage of Amendment 71 last year, which cracked down hard on citizen initiative power. But Amendment 71 certainly didn’t allay citizen anger over this issue–and more likely will help redirect that energy into other electoral battles like local governments and the state legislature.

We believe that in the long run, the rights of residential communities on the surface must inevitably win out over the right to extract minerals from below the surface via heavy industry. The inevitability of that is as certain as the continued urbanization of the Front Range. The rights of residential communities to be safe and control land use within their boundaries, at some level, have to come first.

And in reality, the people who disagree with that are almost always paid to.

Tweet
Share

Comments

13 thoughts on “Setbacks From Schools: The No-Brainer That Somehow Isn’t”

  3. The hell with your property rights. Kids need to breathe, and their brains need to develop. High concentrations of methane tend to limit that. If you want future generations to be able to pay in to Soc Sec and Medicaid to support you in the style to which you are accustomed, you need to take children's health into consideration.

    In Greeley, they're building 25 fricking fracking wells within a softball's throw of the playground of Bella Romero school. Shockingly, this is a school with mostly poor and Latino and immigrant kids.

    But yes, in order to have any chance at all of passage, there would have to be some accommodation for "takings" of rights. I haven't looked into this bill in particular, but it probably has that feature.

    1. It's all bullshit, mama.

      They can park their fucking rigs 2 miles away and access those rights. One of their excuses is money. Directional drilling is more complicated and slightly more expensive than drilling a straight hole from directly atop the minerals. However, that expense is ameliorated by the nature of pool drilling from multi-well drill pads. 

      Mostly they don't want to establish any precedent, ever, but especially now that Der Furher is tossing protections for air, water, people, and animals out the window. They are hoping to roll back regulations by decades.. 

       

        1. The evolution of drilling techniques has been dramatic.

          Once upon a time, all wells were drilled vertically. Then they figured out a way to put a "knuckle" in that drilling pipe and change direction. With the introduction of multiple "knuckles", they developed the capability to change direction at will.

          Hydraulic fracturing techniques have also evolved and it is now possible to find a more or less horizontal shale formation ( as most of them are), turn and drill into the edge of it and follow the formation, instead of drilling from above and just punching holes into the rock strata. The increase in production has turned the industry around in terms of the flexibility companies have in where to locate the drilling pad. Company engineers have bragged to me in the past about how far out they can reach..but the accountants don't want to pay for it.

          Companies don't want to establish a precedent. They will never willingly go there. We will have to push them. 

            1. Aren't we talking primarily about existing wells, 

              nope. You can't change the setback of an existing well. This would apply to new permits only…as I understand it.

              1. Since the first line of the quoted article is this:

                State Rep. Mike Foote’s proposal to require that any future oil and gas wells be located at least 1,000 feet away from schools’ and child care centers’ property lines is headed for debate by the full Colorado House of Representatives after clearing a committee vote on Thursday night

                I think that's a reasonable understanding.

                1. I missed that.  For what it's worth, I don't think such a change would trigger takings issues.  Usually that only affects vested holdings.  

                2. The thing many o&g apologists don't want to discuss is the reality that complaints about o&g practices don't come out of thin air. There are real people at risk.

                  My doctor moved his family away from Rifle during the boom because of the risk to his 3 yr. old daughter and the fetus being carried by his wife at the time. 

                  He was a brilliant young doctor ( an MD with a certification in Naturopathy) and Rifle is  lessened by his leaving.

  4. The wells at Bella Romero are new wells. . Prior to that COGCC approved Extraction's proposal on March 10 and 20. .  I'm not sure what legal action is being proposed to fight this now. Parents and teachers at Bella Romero are mostly unaware of the proposed well.

    The existing proposal places the well pads 500' from the Bella Romero school building, and thus well within breathing space of kids on the playground or athletic fields. The proposed legislation places wells a minimum of 1000' from the school property line, thus well out of that range.  See diagram, below, from Fractracker Alliance:

    The owner of the mineral rights in this case is Greeley School District 6. Presumably, this is a money issue, and the "taking" of young poor children's lung and brain development is a secondary issue. The Greeley City Council is complicit in this crime, for refusing to regulate oil and gas permits within Greeley city limits and in proximity to public buildings.

    I'll keep you posted on developments. For fresh news, join the "No Bella Wells" Facebook group.

  5. If the Dems have any political savvy at all, voting against the setback from the campus property line will become a campaign issue to throttle the incumbent Repubs who voted against it with. "Representative _____ cares more about the O&G industry's bottom lines than he does about your children's health…"

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

133 readers online now

Newsletter

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