NY Law Provides Legal Recourse to Towns Duped by Slottje
A couple weeks now removed from the court decisions on natural gas development handed down in the cases of Dryden and Middlefield, new strategies — and good ones — are finally starting to emerge that could help supporters of responsible development reclaim the legal high-ground and in the process reassert their basic property rights.
Indeed, one of the most effective strategies for turning the tables on the ban-everything crowd has also been among the ones least talked about. Basically, it has to do with a unique requirement of the New York State General Municipal Law that allows counties to require supermajority votes by towns on issues that have “intermunicipal” impacts. It’s a bit complicated but also routine in New York, where of course, by routine, nothing’s not complicated.
The General Municipal Law
It all starts with Section 239 of the General Municipal Law, the relevant provisions of which say:
From Section 239(l):
2. Intent. The purposes of this section, sections two hundred thirty-nine-m and two hundred thirty-nine-n of this article shall be to bring pertinent inter-community and county-wide planning, zoning, site plan and subdivision considerations to the attention of neighboring municipalities and agencies having jurisdiction. Such review may include inter-community and county-wide considerations in respect to the following:
(a) compatibility of various land uses with one another;
(b) traffic generating characteristics of various land uses in relation to the effect of such traffic on other land uses and to the adequacy of existing and proposed thoroughfare facilities;
(c) impact of proposed land uses on existing and proposed county or state institutional or other uses;
(d) protection of community character as regards predominant land uses, population density, and the relation between residential and nonresidential areas;
(e) drainage;
(f) community facilities;
(g) official municipal and county development policies, as may be expressed through comprehensive plans, capital programs or regulatory measures; and
(h) such other matters as may relate to the public convenience, to governmental efficiency, and to the achieving and maintaining of a satisfactory community environment.
From Section 239(m):
4. County planning agency or regional planning council review of proposed actions; recommendation, report.
(a) The county planning agency or regional planning council shall review any proposed action referred for inter-community or county-wide considerations, including but not limited to those considerations identified in section two hundred thirty-nine-l of this article. Such county planning agency or regional planning council shall recommend approval, modification, or disapproval, of the proposed action, or report that the proposed action has no significant county-wide or inter-community impact.
(b) Such county planning agency or regional planning council, or an authorized agent of said agency or council, shall have thirty days after receipt of a full statement of such proposed action, or such longer period as may have been agreed upon by the county planning agency or regional planning council and the referring body, to report its recommendations to the referring body, accompanied by a statement of the reasons for such recommendations. If such county planning agency or regional planning council fails to report within such period, the referring body may take final action on the proposed action without such report. However, any county planning agency or regional planning council report received after thirty days or such longer period as may have been agreed upon, but two or more days prior to final action by the referring body, shall be subject to the provisions of subdivision five of this section.
5. Extraordinary vote upon recommendation of modification or disapproval. If such county planning agency or regional planning council recommends modification or disapproval of a proposed action, the referring body shall not act contrary to such recommendation except by a vote of a majority plus one of all the members thereof.
6. Report of final action. Within thirty days after final action, the referring body shall file a report of the final action it has taken with the county planning agency or regional planning council. A referring body which acts contrary to a recommendation of modification or disapproval of a proposed action shall set forth the reasons for the contrary action in such report.
Note: Emphasis added.
Break it down into plain English, and it appears from the law that towns and municipalities have obligations under these sections to submit proposals seeking to ban natural gas development to county planning agencies, which will review those plans through the lens of potential inter-community or countywide impacts before enacting such laws. Moreover, if the county planning agency recommends a provision of the proposed law be adopted, it can only be enacted by the vote of a majority plus one on the town or village board. In practice, this means the vote can be no less than four to one in such circumstances and the majority must be able to explain its reasons for acting against the county recommendations.
Delaware County Exercises Its Rights and Some Common Sense
We saw these provisions in action recently with the Town of Sidney in Delaware County, New York, where the Town Board proposed to adopt a local law “to effect a Moratorium and Prohibition Within The Town of Sidney Natural Gas and Petroleum Exploration and Extraction Activities, Underground Storage of Natural Gas, and Disposal of Natural Gas or Petroleum Extraction Exploration, and Production Wastes.” A vote on the proposed moratorium was apparently delayed while waiting for the Delaware County Planning Board to act, as if this were merely some technicality, but when the recommendation came on March 7, it was much more than that.
The Delaware County Planning Board disapproved the proposed ban/moratorium on several grounds. The Planning Board said Sidney’s proposed law was “premature and may have negative economic impacts on the County.” Wise words of common sense finally enter the picture! The law is obviously premature because the State of New York has not yet even finished its own permitting process so the Town might know what the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is regulating and, until the Dryden and Middlefield cases are resolved on appeal, no one knows whether town can even venture into this area of law (many, including ourselves, submit they cannot). Nonetheless, it is beyond doubt the restriction of natural gas development as defined by the Town of Sidney would have negative impacts on Delaware County as a whole. This was clear from the testimony from the General Manager of Amphenol Aerospace at the public hearing on the law (read by another employee):
Any county economic development strategy is pretty well sunk when three agenda driven members of one town board can torpedo efforts to extend natural gas infrastructure to the facilities of one of its very largest employers. Whatever the motives of the current majority on the Sidney Town Board, the action they propose would clearly undermine everything Delaware County and the State of New York are attempting to do to ensure the survival of employment opportunities for residents desiring them. Governor Andrew Cuomo said the partnership of the Village of Sidney, the county of Delaware and the State of New York had sent “a message to companies that New York supports its businesses in good times and bad,” but three people apparently don’t see themselves as part of that partnership and prefer to impose their own ideas of community development, which don’t include natural gas. The Delaware County Planning Board has now weighed in and reminded these town officials they can’t operate in a vacuum without regard to the interests of their neighbors.
The Delaware County Planning Board detailed explanation on this point is flawless (emphasis added):
1. The action proposed in the moratorium to change the zoning law is not timely since New York State has not completed their studies and provided guidance for permitting and requirements that must be adhered at the local level. Until these rules and guidance are adopted by the state the executive order prohibiting the issuance of permits for gas extraction remains in effect. Therefore, any local law that would contradict the state rules would be superseded by the state regulations and become moot. It is not recommended that any municipality act before the state to ensure any local laws adopted are in compliance with the state laws and guidelines.
2. The local law as presented is cumbersome and difficult to read or understand. As an example there are a number of instances that the law prohibits application for any of the defined uses; however, there is clause for hardships included. The purposes and intent of the law appear to contradict this section and the process for applying for a variance is unknown given the statements that no applications for a variance shall be accepted.
3. The inclusion of gas pipelines is of great concern from a regional perspective. The pipelines are necessary for the further development of industrial and commercial properties in the Town and Village of Sidney. These are important developments to Delaware County given the large industrial base in Sidney and the jobs that are created by these developments. The inability to create or retain jobs and industrial tax base in this part of the county would be detrimental overall. Delaware County is limited by geography, highway access and the New York City watershed to few areas for industrial growth and Sidney is an important economic stimulus community for the county. The potential regional impacts from the inclusion of gas pipelines in this local law are extensive.
4. Local moratoriums currently being challenged have come at a substantial cost to the communities that have had to expend significant resources to defend the local laws they have enacted. Given the anticipated financial burden to the local tax payers to potentially defend this law it is not advisable for any Delaware County municipality to undertake this action without a direct threat to the community. As previously stated this law is redundant since the executive order prohibiting the issuance of permits for gas extraction remains in effect eliminating any immediate threat to the Town of Sidney at this time.
Pipeline Madness, Anti-Gas Zeal and the Lessons
The county explanation is largely self-explanatory but it is important to reiterate the point it makes about pipelines. One community cannot decide for another where inter-community pipelines are going to be located. Yet, in the zeal of the Great Davidski, Park Foundation-funded attorney David Slottje — whose job is to eliminate every avenue that would allow for the development of anything at all related to natural gas — has presented the Town of Sidney’s current majority with legislation that plainly runs counter to this reality and every facet of New York State law. He repeatedly advises towns to prohibit not only natural gas development, but also distribution and storage. Yet, the law is crystal clear – towns cannot substitute their judgment or control for that of the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC), laid out succinctly in a Norse Energy decision. They can provide input and even suggest substantive standards for consideration by the PSC but cannot require permits and cannot prohibit construction of facilities. Slottje, anxious to secure another notch in his belt to show off to his Park Foundation funders, has been leading Sidney down the yellow-brick road, but the Delaware County Planning Board has wisely blocked his path and erected a big sign that says “Road Closed – There Is No Wizard.”
The lesson here is this: New York counties don’t have to let the Attorneys Slottje play havoc with their economic development strategies. They can insist the needs of neighbors and their counties as a whole be considered by exercising their rights unders Section 239 of the General Municipal Law. They can require a minimum of four members of a town or village board sign onto to the madness if it is to proceed. They can expose the fakery of the magic performed by the Great Davidski. They an insist the law be followed and it’s about time someone did.
Angelika Preston
Posted at 10:38h, 10 MarchIf you want fracking in your town, on your land or next door to you I understand that you support this strategy. However, towns in this area are not all willing to change their landscape and quality of life quite so haphazardly. In my town, Lumberland, there has NEVER been any heavy industry. There isn’t even light industry. There isn’t even a ‘business’ section. It is rural, forested and peaceful which is why all the people CHOSE to live here and want that to remain as such. Our economy is travel and tourism based. We dont’ want to trade that for an industry that will lower all our property values. Those who do are LEAVING. It is in their interest to be able to lease their land for gas. As delusional as that is ie revenues average 70.00 per month after the initial few thousand. Selfishness and narcissistic interests are not supported here. We are a community. Our property rights remain protected and have been for hundreds of years.
Your propaganda cannot work. It never does. Anyone, including yourself, who believes they have the absolute truth by definition has a closed mind. This is the nature of someone who is selfish. If you want to have fracking on your property buy it from someone in Pennsylvania. There are many people looking to sell but can’t because no one wants their property so it’s going cheap. Take your children to visit them. Show off and have your children drink the water from their tap. Just not near an open flame. Join in and post these pictures on this blog. This an even better strategy: it’s called evidence.
Tom
Posted at 13:50h, 10 MarchI know Lumberland. I spent many weeks working in the woods there for a surveyor many years ago. One of my direct ancestors was a Supervisor there at the turn of the century (not this one but two centuries ago). I’ve also written many of the laws now in force in Lumberland. The point of our article has nothing to do with Lumberland per se, which has no gas, but rather the law. What the Slottje’s have sold the town on is simply not going to stand the legal test at the end of the day. There won’t be any gas exploration there but you already have a pipeline and to suggest that this facility or feeder or distribution lines from or to it that might run through your town can be regulated out of existence, as the Slottje’s imply in their draft language, is absurd.
etothek
Posted at 05:44h, 11 MarchIf people are leaving like you say, then I’ll be BUYING. I live in Pennsylvania. I drink the water. It’s perfectly safe. The economy is THRIVING. Everyone around here knows that there’s been gas in the wells in Dimock as long as 50 years ago. The noisemakers are just trying to blame it on high-volume hydraulic fracturing to get as much out of it that they can. There is nothing wrong with HVHF. So if property is coming to market, then that’s great news, because property values will be skyrocketing upwards like they did in PA a few years ago. Thank you for the good news!
Kate Kennedy
Posted at 10:56h, 11 MarchThanks Angelika,
I could not have said it better myself! Selfishiness and greed have driven a wedge in our communities. The majority of residents in the Town 0f Delaware do not want Fracking. According to the NYS Constution and the NYS Assoc. of Towns clearly states that the town boards MUST vote on based on what the MAJORITY of the residents want, not on what the board members want. Board members who have leased land represent a conflict of interests & ethics violations, thus board members w/ leases should not be allowed to vote. The majority shall rule!
Tom
Posted at 15:49h, 11 MarchThat is absolute nonsense. There was just an election in Delaware where gas was the issue and the anti side lost. That is beside the point, however, because we live in a republic that is supposed to protect the rights of minorities against tyrannical majorities. That’s the whole point of the rule of law.
Robert Force
Posted at 14:23h, 10 MarchI’m tired of the anti drilling fear mongering tactics that will chase away gas drilling in the Sidney area. One only has to look at the Green Party and MovOn.Org who are funded by George Soros as is the Parks Foundation to expose their real Agenda. They do not want America to drill for oil or natural gas. Our Government gave two billion of our tax dollars to Brazil for offshore exploratory drilling so that Soros can sell the oil to China. He also owns a large natural gas deposit in New Guineau. Why was the Keystone pipeline stopped in it’s tracks by Obama? One only has to look at George Soros who was his main campaign financier in 2008.I grew up in Western PA in the 70’s and can tell you that our well water will light on fire if the well is not vented. Our water is contaminated from coal mines and strip mining. We also had to add water softener to our water because of the iron in our water. Property values will go down? It will be quite the opposite. Where is the media on this? George soros owns most of the media with the millions he invests in left wing media. Wake up and make America prosper again. Drill here drill now!
Angelika Preston
Posted at 14:52h, 10 MarchIt’s ok with you that your water lights on fire. It’s ok that coal and strip mining has permanently polluted your water supply? You want to add to the pollution with fracking? What are you thinking? By the way where do you live now. Does the water there light on fire?
Tom
Posted at 15:00h, 10 MarchLighting water on fire in this area of the country is nothing new. See http://eidmarcellus.org/blog/when-hogsheads-fly/.
Angelika Preston
Posted at 15:16h, 10 MarchThat doesn’t answer my question. Cancer happens in this area. Does that mean it’s ok…no. People should be OK with the fact that water lights on fire?
Do you think 12,000,000 people in New York City believe it should be OK. Who would chose Sullivan County for second homes if water lights on fire in this area. What would the ad say? …..heating system: natural water no boiler required, monthly cost: $0.00. Water: well water for heating fuel use only. Potable water N/A. I’ll look into the link. Thanks for the heads up I didn’t know we had water that catches fire in this part of the country outside of PA.
Brian
Posted at 16:42h, 10 March“Who would choose Sullivan County for second homes . . .” Are you serious. We aren’t concerned about catering to the tea sipping, Jag driving, second home crowd!!! How about the people that need to pay the mortgage and extra high taxes on their first home. Maybe if all the first home people get nice leases, they won’t have to sell their land at bargain prices to NYC! Wouldn’t that be a nice turn of events!
Angelika Preston
Posted at 20:57h, 10 MarchI’m sorry Brian, you missed the lengthy messages I posted regarding a person who’s business it is to build and sell specifically and only to the weekenders. I did not mean to infer this is who we should care about. I meant to infer that selling to these weekenders and then selling them out with supporting fracking by the guy who is selling them their “country dream” is contradictory. It’s a lot of reading but it is a continuation of the theme on this person. I live here (lumberland) and want to stay without having my water become combustible. I hope this clarifies my post. I am also struggling. It is not easy but truth in advertising still means something to me, even if it is extremely vague these days.
Kilgour Farms
Posted at 10:21h, 11 MarchSorry to tell you but I heard the Lumberland Supervisor tell a group of people that they cater to the second home owner, so much for local concerns. Some of the rewrite in Lumberland is so strict that normal people would object to such things and these aren’t even related to gas development. Lumberland is going for the Bed and Breakfast crowd and ignoring local resident concerns. Sullivan County has been trying to attract tourism in their towns but after 100 years they’re still trying with little success. Wonder what makes them think what they are doing now will make any difference?
If you want your property rights controlled by people who have their interests at heart then by all means endorse what they’re doing, most see it as a town willing to usurp property owner rights for the hope of a utopia of the elite.
Kate Kennedy
Posted at 12:20h, 11 MarchBrian,
First of all you need to get over the stereo typing; I do not have a “jag” (i have a used car) and I don’t drink tea. I grew up in a lower middle class family and my parents didn’t have the money to buy me what ever I wanted. My parents told me If I wanted a record album or a new bike I had to get a job. I got my first job raking lawns & babysitting when I was 11 years old. When I was 14 I got a job on a tiny farm in Long Island and was a migrant farm worker; when I was 16 I worked in a photo processing store. When I was 17 I went to college on scholarships and work study programs and on weekends and summer break I had always had waitress job and I’ve been working ever since. I have a strong work ethic and have found the “locals” to be very lazy and unmotivated to work. I’ve hired many “locals” who never show up, never call to cancel or re-book. Shall I stereo type you “locals” as lazy, ignorant uneducated white-trash, hill-billy, obese, toothless alcoholic bigots?
What would have happened to the local economy if the “City Folk” never bought homes here? The housing market here was bleak before the “City Folk” discovered the area. Because of the city folk, home prices rose and the real estate market was booming; builders and real estate brokers were making lots of money and creating employment for many. The tax revenues for towns increased and that was a good thing. Tourism and second home owners boosted the economy because they shop in our towns, dine at restaurants, stay in B&B’s, take river trips, go camping & hiking, hire carpenters, painters, electricians, plumbers, handy-man, lawn & landscaping maintenance companies, use local pet kennels and veterinarians, buy food from local markets & farmers markets and dairy’s, bank locally, use local lawyers, hire local teens to babysit and work in local shops and restaurants, buy cars from local dealerships, rent vacation homes, buy boats, lease docks, use local pharmacies, local liquor & wine shops, buy building materials and hardware locally…
I bought a home in 1999 and 2nd property in 2006. I was born in Long Island and I am a citizen of the USA. I’ve opened 2 businesses here, created jobs and sales tax revenues for NYS and room tax revenue for the Sullivan County Treasurer. I have raised $3000 for charities in my town and volunteer whenever I asked to help my community. I am a full time resident and I pay a lot of taxes and am deeply offended to be referred to as an out-sider. I have as much right to live here as anyone else. I chose this place of all the places on earth, that’s how much I love it – you just take it all for granted. Everyone here is an outsider unless you’re a Native American and member of the Iroquois Indian Nation.
Grow up Brian and expand your closed little mind… It’s 2012 and the world is global; we are ALL citizens of Planet Earth. The Good old Boys network and old school thinking of “us vs. them” is divisive and it’s crippling this county’s chances to grow new industry’s that will be long lasting (unlike frack jobs) and are compatible with an agrarian rural county.
Tom
Posted at 15:57h, 11 MarchYou say the locals are “very lazy and unmotivated to work.” Well, there’s no stereotyping there is there? Talk about outrageous accusations! And, by the way tourism and natural gas development are fully compatible. Check out: http://eidmarcellus.org/blog/bradford-rising/ and http://eidmarcellus.org/blog/if-this-is-destruction-can-i-have-some-please/
Bryant La Tourette
Posted at 20:44h, 10 MarchAngelika,
Fantastic post… finally someone telling it like it is! A NIMBY standing up to help promote the decay of a once economic viable area that saw the boom and bust of tourism.
I am sure if you were around in its hay day you would be fighting the tourism boom.
You have been captivated by the train wreck of information from both side and do absolutely no hard research. You have become part of the newest cult. Like those of Y2K.
Angelika Preston
Posted at 21:16h, 10 MarchNice backhanded complement. You may be right that hard research is lacking when confronted with the train wreck of information out there. Your point is a very good one. If everyone did their own hard research perhaps we would all find resolution more productive. Regrettably it is human nature to take a stand and only “voice” facts that support that stand. All of us are prone to this and don’t ask enough questions. As a society this is very dangerous. My question is still valid…..is it OK to have tap water that is combustible because of methane content regardless of it’s source? No one has yet answered yes to that. Perhaps everyone can agree on no to that. I would look for an independent source since neither pro or con is unbiased. Hard task indeed in the train wreck of misinformation. I don’t think you know me well enough to make your claim. Where is your hard research to support your accusation of who I am? You haven’t even asked a question. Assumption is the first step to to adding to the train wreck of misinformation.
Michael Salvatore Jr.
Posted at 20:40h, 10 MarchWater that catches on fire…that horror story comes up so ofter.Hydrofracking has come so far in just a few short years.You really have to do your homework Angelika…and the “changing the landscape” part you refer to…isnt permenant…well towers that are lucrative might be but all and all……they drill wells, pound casings…..and take down towers…..R&R, is repair and replace which means that the ground will be restored to what is was if not better…..It is our choice as property owner to pick and choose what we want on what we have….imported fuel effects us americans in every way shape and form…..we are lucky we do have so much dry gas under our feet that can be easily evacuated and to be totally frank with this….im really tired of the others who think they know whats best for my backyard. Everyone in our area WILL benifit eventually on what we do have right under our feet(Mike Salvatore Jr,Windsor,NY)
Angelika Preston
Posted at 21:18h, 10 MarchWhat you vote for in Windsor does not have to be the same as what we vote for in Lumberland. I wish you well…no pun intended.
Bryant La Tourette
Posted at 23:20h, 10 MarchAngelika,
Your concern Combustibility of water. My neighbor can and has always been able to light his water on fire. He has to vent his system. My in-laws can light the water on fire. Not a huge flame the size of a bic lighter. We turn the water on real slow and poof flame. You see Agelika when you sit on top of 37 natural gas plays and two of them are world class that happens.
Before the fine art of seismic the prospectors would contact the well drilling companies water well that is, to find out where they have issues with methane. The well driller in our area Berrows & Sons lost a rig due to fire when he hit methane in a well. That is facts not reports by any side eye witness facts I hope this helps..
Bryant La Tourette
Posted at 23:55h, 10 MarchI would like to comment on the article to put the conversation back on track. First huge thanks to the Eid to put such a timely report together.
I was very concerned earlier in 2011 about town boards being overtaken by one issue candidates. I even wrote a article in our local paper beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing.
The Anti Gas opposition to their credit has been very good at planning. They bring in there people to the lower end of politics ,Town Boards. Then put on a informational meeting on Natural Gas at the local church to indoctrinate through fear. (been their seen it)
The local simple magpies buy into it . The magpies live in the coffee shops and convenient stores and starts the buzzz. Then they have the new anti board member bring in the transient Park funded attorney. The next level, get on the panic wagon before Satan himself will be peeing in your water starts. This must not be the first time in history and probable started with the transient snake oil sales man.That is why they put rules in like super majority. Now if it only worked at the county level.
I think this could all be settled if we look to western NY for answers. Drilling that follows NY rules and guidelines. Where thousands of well have be drilled completed and hydraulically fractured. With (zero issues) around drinking water supplies. It is amazing they do not use NYS information and procedures as cumulative information.
Angelika Preston
Posted at 08:28h, 11 MarchThank you Bryant, that does help. Through a few people who post personal experience and not emotional rhetoric I am learning about what I hoped to discover on this site: what it is like to live on or near a gas well. I am in search of the eyewitness real time experience pros and cons rather than propaganda from either side and self interest driven bullying.
If I understand your point methane comes with the territory and the benefits outweigh the problems. My concern is methane in water and if you can drink, cook, wash or irrigate crops with it. If you can’t what do you do? This issue seems to revolve around water pollution and poisoning. Your neighbor and in-laws have a solution to the fire problem. Ventilation. That is simple enough. Does ventilation also allow them to use it for the purposes I would like to use my water for? I also enjoy that it is free!
Would it not be simpler to declare point blank what the “side effects” of fracking are and here are the solutions in conjunction with demonstrating the benefits of gas drilling locally and nationwide instead of the denial and accusations debate we are living?
Tom
Posted at 10:01h, 11 MarchEnjoying this conversation, Angelika. Quite honestly, I don’t think anybody is hiding anything. You’ll find most companies discussing methane migration with candor and that is how it should be. New York was ahead of the game on that one and Pennsylvania has clearly stepped up its game as well. The companies have made enormous progress. See Brain Oram’s article at: http://www.water-research.net/methanegas.htm
Angelika Preston
Posted at 11:15h, 11 MarchThanks for posting this link Tom. I hope people read it. This is the type of independent information I am looking for. I just gave it a read through and it deserves a more careful one before I can get my head around it all. I want to be sure I am reading what it says and not what I want it to say. Will have some comments and questions after that I am sure! This dialogue to me is very productive. I appreciate it. I’m learning and it helps to develop objectivity on the subject. The sun is out and I am off to enjoy the beautiful environment I live in. Reading comes later.
Kilgour Farms
Posted at 10:34h, 11 MarchLumberland, Highland, Tusten and Bethel have become isolated because of their unrealistic stand on ng development, and many of the towns folk are becoming agitated at there leaders taking it upon themselves to restrict property rights and hence their constitutional rights, you can see this in the local papers. The 2010 elections showed many in the area are in favor of responsible ng development and voted for those who support property rights.
Victor Furman
Posted at 11:44h, 11 MarchThe Truth Well Set You Free (pun intended)
Four years ago as a land owner and NY resident I found myself deep in the question Drill or No Drill? At first I was against it, I didn’t need the money and my land was where I caught fish, hunted meat, and often put a wild turkey on the table at Thanksgiving. I did not want the trucks and drill rigs screwing up my little piece of heaven on earth so I started attending ant meetings and was soon very discouraged about what was being said about the devastation about to be released on our community. I will tell you right up front, I didn’t go to collage because I went in the army for at the time were reasons what I thought to be very patriotic. So without an education on geology and hydrology and the technology of HVHF I had to learn from the ground up and it has been a learning experience. I studied like a geek who loved science and was inspired to do so by the horrific stories I was hearing from the anti drilling leadership. The more I looked into the process of drilling a well the more the anti rhetoric I had heard and read in public handouts became questionable.
1) Do you want high intensity lights shining in your bedroom at night while you sleep ? (The people who I had talked with in PA told me a 5 dollar shade took care of that problem but in most cases it was not a problem at all.)
2. Do you want your water polluted by chemicals and methane ?
Who would !!! and in the very beginning of the Dimock Saga there was an op-ed from a man in Dimock named Lauren Salsman in the Binghamton Papers who’s water was effected by the methane migration as the other 14 families including the Saunters, who spoke out against the myths of chemical pollution Not knowing him I contacted him and tld him I was a NY landowner very concerned about my water and drilling ! lauren asked me if I was willing to drive out to his home and see what all the Carter Road hype was about. A day later I found myself tasting Laurens water and getting a tour of his methane separator that Cabot provided to him. I asked him if it was an inconvenience to have this 8×10 shed and equipment on his property to vent the methane and he said NO!!! we always had methane in our water and this now mitigates it.
What about the chemicals that the news is reporting in your water, the Saunters are telling people the drilling companies put there. NOT TRUE ! he emphatically stated, not true. he then showed and explained to me the water test results taken from an independent lab and explained the levels of naturally occurring TOC’s and was so good at explaining it to me, that I asked him how he knew what all the abbreviations and symbols meant and it was at the point he told me he was an environmental engineer. I was Impressed on the fact that an environmental engineer was living in the midst of the so called Cabot Effected area’ and was not worried.
I asked him does everyone feel the way you do about this problem and that is when the first tour of the effected area took place. Lauren took me from home to home (not all of them because some were told by their lawyers not to allow it) and at each home I got to talk with people about their water. The story was the same, No Chemicals but an increase of methane and everyone I talked too was happy with the mitigation and would lease to Cabot again, some had water/methane separation systems put in others had Cabot dig new water wells just a few feet from the old ones and that mitigated the problem in it’s entirety.
I could go n and on about what I learned in 4 years of studying this issue, the press reports, and the scientific reports but that would be an awful lot of writing so let me just sum it up for you right here. You can take the easy-way out and let others do your thinking for you and hope they have it right… or you can do what you should do and think- study and use your analytical skills yourself like I have, and come to a conclusion that will best satisfy you !!! I’ve done that and I am proud to say that after all my research into this issue that I am confident that drilling will not keep me from putting a Turkey out on the holidays, meat from the freezer, or fish off the grill. This NIMBY is now a pro gas activist who always thought for himself
Cathy McNulty
Posted at 03:32h, 13 MarchOk Let’s keep it simple. Who’s for property rights? Everybody. Hydrofracking is criminal trespass. I live in an Ag and residential district. My zoning is a contract between myself and my neighbors. and adjudicated by my town. That’s it you can’t force industrial Hydrofracking into that scenario no matter how you dress it up. Right. now Tennessee and Cabot are threatening my town with a huge gas transmission line. How many of you think it’s for American use and not for export. Right. But that’s going to be the argument when they want to go over private land. Towns trying to pass laws to protect landowners are doing what they are supposed to do. Gas and oil corporations are probably the biggest corporations in the world. Who’s David? Who’s Goliath?
Tom
Posted at 13:25h, 13 MarchProperty rights aren’t just for those who irresponsibly speculate about harm to their properties from activities on other properties, but, rather, for all. Balancing those rights is what zoning is all about. When there is no balance, as you propose, there are no rights, just impositions. The real David here is the landowner who is seeing his or her rights squashed like a bug by a second-home Goliath determined to impose his will regardless of the facts and regardless of anyone else’s rights.
Angelika Preston
Posted at 22:02h, 13 MarchIf I understand you correctly, you maintain that every single individual property owner across the country should have or currently has the right to do with their property what ever they please regardless of how it effects anyone or anything else? Is this the meaning of property rights? Or, do you mean carte blanche should be reserved for revenue producing freedoms and no landowner should be restricted to what that (legal) activity might be? If it applies to gas leasing it should apply to any type of leasing or land use.
While everyone might get excited by the thought of bonus payments in the six figures and not worry too much about royalties if the well doesn’t get implemented, it is interesting to research and review what the leasing company’s require. They aren’t interested in a few acres. It is hundreds of acres. One square mile to be exact and that means that groups of contiguous landowner agreements are required.
It would seem that rights over one’s own land use (unless you have over 600 acres) is a shared effort at the end of the day. This eliminates the worry that someone on the 2 to 10 acres next door will sign a lease. Not going to happen.
Here is one article that points out some realities of leases:
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/marcellus-shale-could-be-a-boon-or-bane-for-land-owners-165927/?p=1
Another one: A natural gas forum for landowners pro gas, well organized information on what is involved, pitfalls and how to negotiate:
http://www.naturalgasforums.com/naturalgasforums.php
At the end of the day it appears that all of this “screaming” on land ownership rights has no ground. How many of the people fighting this property rights battle actually have an offer of a lease? How many will even have the opportunity presented to them? Do you have at least 100 acres to offer along with neighbors who do? Where is the individualism? Meanwhile everyone is over the top hysterical about 2 to 10 acre rural property rights. I could be wrong but it looks like the small landowners are being whipped into a froth to support a platform that will only benefit large landowners.
Tom
Posted at 10:39h, 14 MarchLand use regulations are a derogation of the common law, which means you cannot take away someone’s rights without a compelling reason that justifies compromising one person’s rights to protect another. The idea of banning natural gas development is directly contradictory to this principle because there is no attempt to balance the rights. Rather, it simply adopts the position of own group of people without consideration of the other. That is anything but what zoning is about. Moreover, it isn’t just the large landowners who benefit. Everyone who gets a job, saves on their heating costs or experiences lower taxes benefits. All those things happen with natural gas development. The record on this in Bradford and Susquehanna Counties is clear. The Elk Lake School is a prime example.
Cathy McNulty
Posted at 10:38h, 22 MarchPlease see the great presentation by FLEASED an organization that helps leaseholders who feel like they have been cheated and lied to by landsmen get out of their leases, recently presented in Sidney NY and available online on Facebook at Sustainable Sidney or Vicc Video on UTUBE. Let’s start having a real discussion because we are both the Davids and big oil and gas interests are Goliath and they are watching us fight with each other.
Tom
Posted at 11:45h, 22 MarchNot much impressed by FLEASED.
Cathy McNulty
Posted at 10:27h, 22 March“irresponsible speculation about harm”
It’s exactly the irresponsible speculation of land LLCs that I am worried about. These speculators don’t live on the land they hope to drill and will leave their neighbors with all the real risk to health, use and enjoyment of their property.
Tom
Posted at 10:30h, 22 MarchThat’s irrelevant if things are being done safely by the companies leasing the land and they are.