Job-Threatening Colorado Bill Advances Again

Job-Threatening Colorado Bill Advances Again
Senate Bill 19-181 has passed through the Colorado Senate Finance Committee after advancing through the State Senate Transportation and Energy Committee earlier this week.

Senate Bill 19-181 has passed through the Colorado Senate Finance Committee after advancing through the State Senate Transportation & Energy Committee earlier this week.

A motion to progress the bill to the committee on appropriations passed on a vote of 4-3. The bill is scheduled to be tabled to this committee on Friday.  

“It is absolutely unconscionable for Democratic leadership in the State Senate to continue to advance this jobs-killing bill at breakneck speed without sufficient input from every Coloradan who it would affect,” Colorado Petroleum Council (CPC) Executive Director, Tracee Bentley, said in an organization statement.

“This measure would dramatically and permanently alter Colorado’s energy landscape, putting at immediate risk hundreds of thousands of jobs, billions of dollars of critical state revenue and hundreds of millions in direct funding for public education,” Bentley added.

“As a leading advocate for the 233,000 Colorado women and men whose livelihoods depend on the natural gas and oil industry, we will continue to sound the alarm at full volume,” Bentley continued.

According to the Colorado General Assembly website, SB19-181 “enhances local governments' ability to protect public health, safety, and welfare and the environment by clarifying, reinforcing, and establishing their regulatory authority over the surface impacts of oil and gas development”.

In an organization statement posted on its website earlier this week, the American Petroleum Institute (API) said the bill would “at the very least hinder, if not prohibit” energy development in Colorado.

The CPC is a division of the API, which describes itself as the only national trade association representing all facets of the natural gas and oil industry.

For more information on SB19-181, please click here.


Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

Andy  |  March 21, 2019
Has anyone yet thought that technically this law could be unconstitutional based off of the Colorado State Constitution? Since it essentially allows local governments to enact Proposition 112, it would, in my opinion, violate Article 2 Section 1 of the Colorado State Constitution which says, "All political power is vested in and derived from the people; all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole." Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that also mean that if the people of Colorado reject a law at the ballots, the State Legislature CANNOT simply pass the same law or a law that does the same thing as the rejected law?
CO Res  |  March 18, 2019
This is just another liberal money grab from fees and ignorant legislation, allowing ONE county to dictate the states laws. Gov't wins (more and higher fees thru abject theft) residents lose (fewer jobs as companies layoff 1000's due to extra costs). It must be a terrible idea if the CO dems have to rush it thru the legislature in the midle of the night....think about it.....Prop 112 fails and the dems turn to socialist tactics.....time to wake up Colorado.
Brian  |  March 14, 2019
On the plus side, when these liberal policies fail, it will be easier for us to purge the communists and socialists from public service.
Randy Verret  |  March 11, 2019
The main concern I have with SB 19-181 is the false premise that (somehow) COGCC has NOT protected health, safety & welfare in the regulation of the oil & gas industry. By allowing local municipalities that have dubious levels of technical expertise to be able to override state authority on oil & gas matters creates a broad range of uncertainty & potential for unintended consequences. These local authorities (already) have input & jurisdiction on noise, road use, dust & other "nuisance" features. Based on the language in Article 60, it would appear an adjoining jurisdiction could override a decision by another municipality to grant approval on an oil & gas siting. Therefore, Boulder County would be able to "veto" a project in adjacent Weld County if it deemed the project did not adequately protect the health & welfare of the public. If my interpretation is correct, then Boulder County better be ready to be SUED by mineral owners (in Weld) for the resulting "taking" when their subsurface interests are stranded. Looks like a lot of room for unintended consequences on several fronts. I do not see a RUSH when you are considering legislation on such a complex & nuanced set of operational parameters. I'm not saying reforms are not needed, just a thoughtful, comprehensive debate & collaboration amongst stakeholders to achieve optimal results...
Floyd Burgoz  |  March 11, 2019
To Colorado Residents: When power outages become common, only then will the Colorado public at large travel to the Library card of informed and factual non-demonizing literature on this subject. Remember why and how you get light from a simple bulb when you switch it on in Colorado.
Down South OilMan  |  March 11, 2019
I'd like somebody to explain what it is in the bill that is going to result in the mayhem and job losses being alluded to. I has a quick scan and couldn't see much that was unreasonable. Just as one example, why should the upstream oil industry be exempt from a County's authority to regulate noise? Don't people have a right to live in peace and quiet? I've been on drilling rigs on land in Germany and Holland and they have no problem complying with local noise and environmental regulations, and they know they don't have the right to do whatever they want with no responsibility to the owners of the resource (ie: the citizenry!) It's time to wise up IMHO. We in the oil industry should start playing by the same rules as every other industry and start respecting the prevailing environmental expectations of the wider public, because if we adopt the attitude that we are not part of the wider the community then the wider community may well decide that we have no place in their community.
Mac hampson  |  March 11, 2019
This is direct result of bad behavior on the part of energy producers large and small first on the western slope, then in southern Colorado and northeast Colorado. As an ex compliance contractor in the piance basin I have seen operators repeatedly do stupid things from dumping frac water into reservoirs to allowing tailings pits to pollute rivers into brown waterfalls visible from i70. All of the situations i witnessed could have easily and realatively cheaply been mitigated but the operators decided to say the heck with the public and did nothing. That's why the environmentalists have ammo to throw at this. Too bad the operators don't care on one bit about the 230000 people. Because they would leave them all out in the cold for a 10$ shift in oil prices. Too bad so sad don't defecate where you eat gentlemen.
Bryan Bogosian  |  March 09, 2019
Typical liberal Democrat move to push electric cars on the public without their vote or support, be careful what you pass before you know if your people will leave and you will have a tax revenue issue just like California.
Randy Verret  |  March 08, 2019
Folks in industry are completely missing the point and how this has evolved. The general public, unfortunately, seems to be largely scientifically & mathematically illiterate on energy. So, talking about economic consequence when your opponents are claiming the "environmental high ground" will continue to be an ineffective approach. The average voter in Colorado (right now) will look at the supposed mandate of "enhancing public health, safety & environmental welfare" as perfectly reasonable at this stage. Until there is significant job loss, exorbitant & unreliable energy costs/availability, there is nothing TANGIBLE to understand the consequences of a short sighted & uninformed decision. With the successful "demonization" of the oil & gas industry over the past decade, why would anyone be surprised there would be little sympathy, right? All I can suggest is when utility & fuel bills skyrocket, tax bases erode and rolling blackouts become frequent that any blame is aimed at the appropriate activist groups & legislators that foisted this ill conceived referendum on a (current) unsuspecting public...
Mark Webb  |  March 08, 2019
"Unconscionable" is indeed the correct term. Liberals + millennials + dope smokers = utopia; just see today's headlines below of where we're headed: Venezuela plunges into darkness amid widespread outage... Govt blames 'sabotage'... Nation grinds to halt... Food supplies 'run out next week'...