Denton Fracking Ban Looks to have Passed

[UNTflyer]

With 21 of 39 precincts reporting, Denton Fracking Ban has a solid 60% - 40% lead.

[eagle2014]

Well damn, but at least the liquor proposal passed.

[KingDL1]

Stupidity in action

[Army of Dad]

Lawsuit to stop the ban has already been filed.

http://c.bizjournals.com/ct/c/80855831/NTc3NTE1NzE6OjM0NjQ2MDQ

[FirefightnRick]

Stupidity in action

Exactly!

Rick

[Christopher Walker]

^^^

Says people who don't have to unexpectedly live 100 feet from an industrial well site.

[Censored by Laurie]

Lawsuit to stop the ban has already been filed.

http://c.bizjournals.com/ct/c/80855831/NTc3NTE1NzE6OjM0NjQ2MDQ

good. hopefully this will set the precedent and we can finally do away with this stupid voting thing for good.

[Coffee and TV]

On the one hand the science on fracking side effects is still under review. On the other hand, I've seen people light the water that flows from their kitchen sink on fire. So....

[Army of Dad]

good. hopefully this will set the precedent and we can finally do away with this stupid voting thing for good.

let's see if they will put up the stupid bans on flying more than three flags and phone use while driving first. Edited November 5, 2014 by Army of Dad

[CMJ]

On the one hand the science on fracking side effects is still under review. On the other hand, I've seen people light the water that flows from their kitchen sink on fire. So....

Yeah, I am generally not that big of an environmentalist really. However, all the most compelling stuff I have seen on fracking points me to the anti side. You want to pump more CO2 in the air, that's cool. Don't screw with my water supply though.

Edited November 5, 2014 by CMJ

[UNT90]

Denton.

The community of NO!

Really, really dumb.

[GreenGuy123]

Regardless of anyone's position on the issue, I think it would be a shame for the State to step in and overrule the outcome of a legitimate municipal vote. If that's to happen, I think it would be a mockery of what's supposed to be a democratic process and give little meaning to the power of a vote. All I hear from Austin is how bad big government is and that important decisions ought to be left up to the local citizens. Well, here is their chance to put their money where their mouth is.

Edited November 5, 2014 by GreenGuy123

[GreenBat]

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/11/05/denton-fracking-ban-sees-first-lawsuit/

[meangreendork]

Yeah, I am generally not that big of an environmentalist really. However, all the most compelling stuff I have seen on fracking points me to the anti side. You want to pump more CO2 in the air, that's cool. Don't screw with my water supply though.

Even if the gases released into the air are clean, the pads are still an eyesore, the operations can be heard from hundreds of feet away, inside of buildings, and the fumes smell bad and can be headache-inducing. That's enough for me, and if the claims about seismic activity, chemical fumes, and water seepage are anywhere as bad as I've read in truth, that's just more reason.

[Green P1]

let's see if they will put up the stupid bans on flying more than three flags and phone use while driving first.

You know the guy could have applied for a waiver and paid a fee and this non-issue never would have become an issue right? Frenchy has a hard on against the city for putting an end to his various other ordinance violations... None of which he could appeal to the masses behind the veil of patriotism for support.

I can't wait for the citizens of Denton to rally to my support the next time code enforcement flags me for storing too many yard care supplies around the side of my house!!

[Army of Dad]

You know the guy could have applied for a waiver and paid a fee and this non-issue never would have become an issue right? Frenchy has a hard on against the city for putting an end to his various other ordinance violations... None of which he could appeal to the masses behind the veil of patriotism for support.

I can't wait for the citizens of Denton to rally to my support the next time code enforcement flags me for storing too many yard care supplies around the side of my house!!

Which would only cover 90 days a year and is far less of an issue for tax payers. The frack ban will result in litigation, and is unlikely to stand anyway.

[Army of Dad]

Regardless of anyone's position on the issue, I think it would be a shame for the State to step in and overrule the outcome of a legitimate municipal vote. If that's to happen, I think it would be a mockery of what's supposed to be a democratic process and give little meaning to the power of a vote. All I hear from Austin is how bad big government is and that important decisions ought to be left up to the local citizens. Well, here is their chance to put their money where their mouth is.

Except that there are many things that local subdivisions do not get to control. Traffic laws (especially signage, but also vehicle requirements), gun laws, water rights and voting laws are just a few examples of issues that are held above the city level of government.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Army of Dad

[KingDL1]

On the one hand the science on fracking side effects is still under review. On the other hand, I've seen people light the water that flows from their kitchen sink on fire. So....

Denton is mostly city water, and a well can go bad all by itself and it is always recommended to have your well tested once a year. This is long before fracking even existed.

When to have your well tested

At a minimum, check your well every spring to make sure there are no mechanical problems; test it once each year for total coliform bacteria, nitrates, total dissolved solids, and pH levels. If you suspect other contaminants, you should test for those as well. However, spend time identifying potential problems as these tests can be expensive. The best way to start is to consult a local expert, such as the local health department, about local contaminants of concern. You should also have your well tested if:

• There are known problems with well water in your area
• You have experienced problems near your well (i.e., flooding, land disturbances, and nearby waste disposal sites)
• You replace or repair any part of your well system
• You notice a change in water quality (i.e., taste, color, odor)

[UNT90]

Regardless of anyone's position on the issue, I think it would be a shame for the State to step in and overrule the outcome of a legitimate municipal vote. If that's to happen, I think it would be a mockery of what's supposed to be a democratic process and give little meaning to the power of a vote. All I hear from Austin is how bad big government is and that important decisions ought to be left up to the local citizens. Well, here is their chance to put their money where their mouth is.

Totally agree.

If the citizens of Denton want to vote to live in the dark ages, let them.

Doesn't mean it isn't stupid, thoough.

[oldguystudent]

My jury is still out on fracking. I'm neither for nor against it, and do think that more studies should happen, a la the leaded gasoline back in the day, widely and angrily discredited. That said, the flaming water is either a hoax or a natural phenomenon unrelated to fracking.

I'm more prone to believe the earthquakes over the flaming water, and being the tree hugging left coaster that I am, I kinda miss a good shake every now and again.

[KRAM1]

So much dis-information and bad science flowing here regarding Fracking from both sides. Easy to see that emotions trump knowledge and reality here on GMG.Com just as it did throughout Denton regarding this drilling ban...and make no mistake about it...IT IS a drilling ban. In the Barnett Shale you can drill all you want, but you will find no gas unless you frack. So, call it a Fracking ban, but in reality it is a drilling ban.

But, that is really beside the point. In Texas mineral rights owners trump surface rights owners in the majority of the cases...as odd as that may seem to some. This ban, as it is written (how many of you actually took the time to read the entire proposition?) appears to be unconstitutional. That is the real issue here. The lawsuits are already being filed and the taxpayers of Denton will pay and pay and pay. I can hear the lawyers laughing now! This ordinance could have been written properly and within the framework of the Texas Constitution, and both sides could have been reasonably pleased. But, no...emotions and a weak and poor city council and mayor punted and sent it to a vote. A vote where many who pay no property taxes nor will be living in Denton long voted. This was an issue the city council was elected to decide. This is exactly the type of stuff the council should be deciding. But, because we now have such a weak mayor and council who seem to want to take Denton back to the anti-growth, anti-business days of yore...they punted on their responsibilities.

I personally do not favor nor oppose a ban on Fracking. What I do oppose is an emotion driven campaign in support of an unconstitutional regulation that was forced upon the voters by a weak city council, that could have been crafted to suit both parties and avoid all this stupid lawsuit waste of money! The crap flowing from both sides in this election is just the result of emotions and a city council NOT doing their job.

Get your checkbooks ready property owners of Denton....stupid, just stupid!

[MeanGreenTexan]

So much dis-information and bad science flowing here regarding Fracking from both sides. Easy to see that emotions trump knowledge and reality here on GMG.Com just as it did throughout Denton regarding this drilling ban...and make no mistake about it...IT IS a drilling ban. In the Barnett Shale you can drill all you want, but you will find no gas unless you frack. So, call it a Fracking ban, but in reality it is a drilling ban.

But, that is really beside the point. In Texas mineral rights owners trump surface rights owners in the majority of the cases...as odd as that may seem to some. This ban, as it is written (how many of you actually took the time to read the entire proposition?) appears to be unconstitutional. That is the real issue here. The lawsuits are already being filed and the taxpayers of Denton will pay and pay and pay. I can hear the lawyers laughing now! This ordinance could have been written properly and within the framework of the Texas Constitution, and both sides could have been reasonably pleased. But, no...emotions and a weak and poor city council and mayor punted and sent it to a vote. A vote where many who pay no property taxes nor will be living in Denton long voted. This was an issue the city council was elected to decide. This is exactly the type of stuff the council should be deciding. But, because we now have such a weak mayor and council who seem to want to take Denton back to the anti-growth, anti-business days of yore...they punted on their responsibilities.

I personally do not favor nor oppose a ban on Fracking. What I do oppose is an emotion driven campaign in support of an unconstitutional regulation that was forced upon the voters by a weak city council, that could have been crafted to suit both parties and avoid all this stupid lawsuit waste of money! The crap flowing from both sides in this election is just the result of emotions and a city council NOT doing their job.

Get your checkbooks ready property owners of Denton....stupid, just stupid!

You kinda make it sound like it will be an easy win for the oil companies to win their litigation. If so, why would they have spent so much money campaigning against the proposition?

I agree that it is going to hurt the City's pocketbook, and I wonder if this was taken into account (the lawsuits if passed) when sending this to a vote.

[oldguystudent]

Honest question of logistics. Wouldn't the city have its own legal team on salary, thus keeping legal fees a fixed cost, lawsuit or none?

[Ryan Munthe]

So much dis-information and bad science flowing here regarding Fracking from both sides. Easy to see that emotions trump knowledge and reality here on GMG.Com just as it did throughout Denton regarding this drilling ban...and make no mistake about it...IT IS a drilling ban. In the Barnett Shale you can drill all you want, but you will find no gas unless you frack. So, call it a Fracking ban, but in reality it is a drilling ban.

But, that is really beside the point. In Texas mineral rights owners trump surface rights owners in the majority of the cases...as odd as that may seem to some. This ban, as it is written (how many of you actually took the time to read the entire proposition?) appears to be unconstitutional. That is the real issue here. The lawsuits are already being filed and the taxpayers of Denton will pay and pay and pay. I can hear the lawyers laughing now! This ordinance could have been written properly and within the framework of the Texas Constitution, and both sides could have been reasonably pleased. But, no...emotions and a weak and poor city council and mayor punted and sent it to a vote. A vote where many who pay no property taxes nor will be living in Denton long voted. This was an issue the city council was elected to decide. This is exactly the type of stuff the council should be deciding. But, because we now have such a weak mayor and council who seem to want to take Denton back to the anti-growth, anti-business days of yore...they punted on their responsibilities.

I personally do not favor nor oppose a ban on Fracking. What I do oppose is an emotion driven campaign in support of an unconstitutional regulation that was forced upon the voters by a weak city council, that could have been crafted to suit both parties and avoid all this stupid lawsuit waste of money! The crap flowing from both sides in this election is just the result of emotions and a city council NOT doing their job.

Get your checkbooks ready property owners of Denton....stupid, just stupid!

Normally agree with your posts, but there's a lot of misinformation here.

It may technically be a full on drilling ban, due to the properties of the Shale, but the ban is procedural. There are no "surface vs mineral rights" arguments because the ban is against a particular method of retrieving it. There's nothing stopping the oil companies from putting wells up on their properties or mineral rights owners from selling it. The ban says you can't shoot water down into the well in people's backyards. Furthermore, this ban is the result of tone deaf companies who refused to compromise repeatedly.

The city has already set aside $4 million dollars for lawsuits and are quite confident that they will not cost anymore than that, with no extra burden on the taxpayers for the existing $4 million set aside. The city is quite confident it will win because the ban is procedural, I am not sure you even read the ban.

There's no anti-growth sentiment at all. Denton is a college, small town with a liberal-leaning central city who didn't want wells in their backyard. They want to make Denton a destination city that people want to live in (which has been successful, judging by the numerous awards it keeps winning and the massive growth in population and overall size.) Denton is already one of the safest cities in Texas, and the median income continues to rise as the arts/music scene continues to grow at an astronomical rate. Denton is no longer a hidden treasure, musicians who are trying to make it now live here, contribute here and are ultimately helping the city's profile. The drilling economy is less than 1% of our economy, manufacturing and UNT being the major players, and we have a burgeoning tech scene which is the wave of the future, not our ever-scarce fossil fuels being harvested in people's backyards. The city council knew exactly what they were doing.

The average age of the voter was 51, by the way, so your comment about people voting for it who are not long Denton residents is factually incorrect. There was a massive influx of UNT students voting, but I still fail to see the issue in that despite what the pro-industry people want to say is "bohemian liberal college students." Are we really complaining about young people voting in a midterm election?

The lawsuits are small business, the real concern will be the Texas RR Commission wanting to claim superior over fossil fuel laws via the city due to the Texas Constitution. Problem even there is the Texas Constitution is so terribly written that there are also amendments that give the city trump power over the Texas RR Commission, despite them having trump power as well.

This was emotional, because it affected people emotionally. On one side, you had people fearing their well-being and concerned about our already worse-than-Houston air quality as well as having wells 200 feet from their house...on the other side, you had people fearing losing their jobs, rights and well-being. Can't separate emotion from it.

It's untested waters, and we will see how it plays out. Either way, it set a big precedent.

Honest question of logistics. Wouldn't the city have its own legal team on salary, thus keeping legal fees a fixed cost, lawsuit or none?

Yes. They set aside $4 million to fight lawsuits. When they put the ban up, they knew it would face legal challenges.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Ryan Munthe

[Censored by Laurie]

Normally agree with your posts, but there's a lot of misinformation here.

It may technically be a full on drilling ban, due to the properties of the Shale, but the ban is procedural. There are no "surface vs mineral rights" arguments because the ban is against a particular method of retrieving it. There's nothing stopping the oil companies from putting wells up on their properties or mineral rights owners from selling it. The ban says you can't shoot water down into the well in people's backyards. Furthermore, this ban is the result of tone deaf companies who refused to compromise repeatedly.

The city has already set aside $4 million dollars for lawsuits and are quite confident that they will not cost anymore than that, with no extra burden on the taxpayers for the existing $4 million set aside. The city is quite confident it will win because the ban is procedural, I am not sure you even read the ban.

There's no anti-growth sentiment at all. Denton is a college, small town with a liberal-leaning central city who didn't want wells in their backyard. They want to make Denton a destination city that people want to live in (which has been successful, judging by the numerous awards it keeps winning and the massive growth in population and overall size.) Denton is already one of the safest cities in Texas, and the median income continues to rise as the arts/music scene continues to grow at an astronomical rate. Denton is no longer a hidden treasure, musicians who are trying to make it now live here, contribute here and are ultimately helping the city's profile. The drilling economy is less than 1% of our economy, manufacturing and UNT being the major players, and we have a burgeoning tech scene which is the wave of the future, not our ever-scarce fossil fuels being harvested in people's backyards. The city council knew exactly what they were doing.

The average age of the voter was 51, by the way, so your comment about people voting for it who are not long Denton residents is factually incorrect. There was a massive influx of UNT students voting, but I still fail to see the issue in that despite what the pro-industry people want to say is "bohemian liberal college students." Are we really complaining about young people voting in a midterm election?

The lawsuits are small business, the real concern will be the Texas RR Commission wanting to claim superior over fossil fuel laws via the city due to the Texas Constitution. Problem even there is the Texas Constitution is so terribly written that there are also amendments that give the city trump power over the Texas RR Commission, despite them having trump power as well.

This was emotional, because it affected people emotionally. On one side, you had people fearing their well-being and concerned about our already worse-than-Houston air quality as well as having wells 200 feet from their house...on the other side, you had people fearing losing their jobs, rights and well-being. Can't separate emotion from it.

It's untested waters, and we will see how it plays out. Either way, it set a big precedent.

Yes. They set aside $4 million to fight lawsuits. When they put the ban up, they knew it would face legal challenges.