Update

Oil and Gas Surface Owners Protection Bill Killed—Again


By Ken Wright, 4-09-06

 
 

Legislative sponsors have withdrawn a controversial "Surface Owners Protection Act" bill for Colorado, again sinking legislation that legislators have tried to enact for more than two years. The present form of the bill initially had been supported by environmentalists, property owners, and the real estate industry for strengthening rights of "split estate" landowners -- those who own the property but not the mineral rights under the property.

In its initial form, the legislation would have required energy companies to work with landowners on the placement of facilities, use the best practices available to minimize impacts, and to fairly compensate surface owners for use and damage of the property. Supporters, though, turned against the bill after they claim it was re-written by the oil-and-gas industry to the point where it actually undercut existing property-owner rights. Supporters then turned critics, urging the bill's defeat, after it passed the Colorado House last week and was set for a vote before the full senate on Friday. Sponsors Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, and Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, pulled the bill before it could be voted upon.

"Both sides dug their heels in to the point that negotiation wasn't going to get us there and the rhetoric got so heated," Isgar explained to the the Associated Press. "It's unfortunate because the people I was really trying to protect -- the surface owners, the farmers, the ranchers -- they needed a bill and they needed some negotiating party. They didn't see that in the bill."

Curry expressed similar frustration. "We had to convince oil and gas companies that responsible legislation would allow them to conduct their business in a predictable way," she told the Herald. "while assuring that surface owners are given a fair shake and a level playing field in negotiating with oil and gas companies."

Death of the bill may mean the battle will only heat up -- surface-owner rights advocates have threatened to next push for a ballot initiative on the issue.



Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.

NEW WEST FEATURES                                                                 More>>

Advertisement

Comments

Be the first to comment on this article. Please complete the form below.


Your Comment

Comment policy:

NewWest.Net encourages robust and lively, but civil participation from our readers. By posting here, you agree to the NewWest.Net terms of service. You agree to keep your comments on topic, respectful and free of gratuitous profanity. Contributions that engage in personal attacks, racism, sexism, bigotry, hatred or are otherwise patently offensive will be subject to removal.

Other than using a filter that scans for comment spam, we do not moderate contributions before they are posted and we do not review every thread, so we ask that you help us in keeping the discussions civil and appropriate. Please email info@newwest.net to notify us of comments that may violate these guidelines. Thanks for your help and cooperation. Click here for some tips on how to best interact on NewWest.Net.

You must be a registered user to submit comments, if you are not, register here for free.


Name

Email

Remember my name and email address.

Notify me of follow-up comments.

Advertisement
 

Marketplace