Jump to content
  • Welcome to GoMeanGreen.com!

    Thank you for visiting us!  Registering is easy and free, and provides you with the ability to participate in the discussions along with many cool features and content.

In Denton, Texas, voters approve 'unprecedented' fracking ban


Recommended Posts

"People recognize this is a mainstream issue," said Adam Briggle, 37, vice president of the group behind the ban, Frack Free Denton.

Briggle, an associate professor of philosophy at the University of North Texas, said the ban was a last resort. He and other organizers had worked for years to strengthen industry regulations, but the industry found ways to work around them, he said.

Texas produced about a third of the country's natural gas last year, the greatest share of any state, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Denton sits atop the Barnett Shale, one of the largest natural gas reserves in the country, with about 275 natural gas wells in the city and scores more on the outskirts.

Last year, the Denton City Council prohibited new wells within 1,200 feet of homes, but many existing wells are closer, Briggle said.

People recognize this is a mainstream issue.

Read more; http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-texas-fracking-20141108-story.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That seems to have worked real well for the Republicans nation wide. It's nice to see that at least one community in America is not fooled by that sort of thing.

I'm not your bud. I don't know you. You don't know me. I don't care to know you. Let's agree to disagree. Hell, it wont affect me after I graduate anyways. So I don't even know why I'm wasting time wi

Says the man who promissed he was done posting.

Probably not. Less than 1% of Denton's revenue come from gas well permits. Most of the people who work the sites live elsewhere. The revenues go to corporations in Dallas or Houston.

Denton won't feel a thing, even from the lawsuits. Pennsylvania, Colorado, New York towns each spent well under $1 million defending their bans.

The industry spent a lot of money trying to instill fear into our citizens.

  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not. Less than 1% of Denton's revenue come from gas well permits. Most of the people who work the sites live elsewhere. The revenues go to corporations in Dallas or Houston.

Denton won't feel a thing, even from the lawsuits. Pennsylvania, Colorado, New York towns each spent well under $1 million defending their bans.

The industry spent a lot of money trying to instill fear into our citizens.

That seems to have worked real well for the Republicans nation wide. It's nice to see that at least one community in America is not fooled by that sort of thing.

Edited by SilverEagle
  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not. Less than 1% of Denton's revenue come from gas well permits. Most of the people who work the sites live elsewhere. The revenues go to corporations in Dallas or Houston.

Denton won't feel a thing, even from the lawsuits. Pennsylvania, Colorado, New York towns each spent well under $1 million defending their bans.

The industry spent a lot of money trying to instill fear into our citizens.

While Denton is not poor it's not flush with cash either. They need to spend perhaps tens of millions to repair/expand their roads. I have no idea what shape other infrastructure (ie. water and sewer) is in but if their roads are in the shape they are currently in, Denton's underground infrastructure might be in a similar state of disrepair.

Some day (who knows when though) they'll expand Bonnie Brae. Some day ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait until Denton gets the legal bills for defending the ban. Denton vs. the State of Texas should be real interesting.

It will be minimal. In Colorado, Longmont, Broomfield and Lafayette combined spent about $100k defending their ban. In Dryden, NY, the cost was $38k.

The threat of the cost of lawsuits is nothing but another fear tactic from the industry. They're not going to spend millions fighting the ban when they can just move their operations 1000 yards outside city limits.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention, if you looks at a map of active drills inside Denton city limits, there really isn't a lot left to tap in to.

The industry will save face, put up a little bit of a fight. I have always suspected this wasn't about Denton, but about the precedent we set with this vote.

This happened last December:

"The Dallas City Council passed Wednesday new restrictions that bar hydraulic fracturing within 1,500 feet of a home, school, church, and other protected areas. The new rules effectively ban the practice within the city."

Petroleum engineer Bill Crowder of Dallas indicated that the economic and legal wrangling over fracking in the city is not yet over.

“I want you to look me in the eye next February or March,” he said, according to the Dallas Morning News, “when I ask you, ‘What the heck were you thinking?’”

While a few have been filed, Dallas wasn't flooded with lawsuits, which certainly has deeper pockets and a prime target for lawyers.

Edited by UNTflyer
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, a majority of the permenant residents voted against the ban. It was the 60,000 some odd combined college students that voted 90% for the ban. I'm from Midland Texas, which, last time I checked had the lowest unemployment rate in the country because of oil and gas. The ban will hurt Denton more than you think. A lot of people will lose jobs

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be minimal. In Colorado, Longmont, Broomfield and Lafayette combined spent about $100k defending their ban. In Dryden, NY, the cost was $38k.

The threat of the cost of lawsuits is nothing but another fear tactic from the industry. They're not going to spend millions fighting the ban when they can just move their operations 1000 yards outside city limits.

Did a former Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice actively campaign against their ban?

Link to post
Share on other sites

While Denton is not poor it's not flush with cash either. They need to spend perhaps tens of millions to repair/expand their roads. I have no idea what shape other infrastructure (ie. water and sewer) is in but if their roads are in the shape they are currently in, Denton's underground infrastructure might be in a similar state of disrepair.

Some day (who knows when though) they'll expand Bonnie Brae. Some day ...

Hence why Denton voters also overwhelmingly approved a $100M bond package this cycle, 70% of which address roads, drainage, and storm sewers.

Wait until Denton gets the legal bills for defending the ban. Denton vs. the State of Texas should be real interesting.

And the legal warchest already has a foundation. $4M has already been set aside in preparation for the challenges ahead.

Actually, a majority of the permenant [sic?] residents voted against the ban. It was the 60,000 some odd combined college students that voted 90% for the ban. I'm from Midland Texas, which, last time I checked had the lowest unemployment rate in the country because of oil and gas. The ban will hurt Denton more than you think. A lot of people will lose jobs

Ah, looks like someone has been reading the industry press releases which feature completely fabricated factoids.

http://rodenfordenton.com/2014/11/did-a-college-town-ban-fracking/

Sorry bud, what you're saying just isn't true and there would be no way of knowing either way. Ballots are secret for a reason.

The fact of the matter is that the permanent residents of Denton passed the ban in large margin and widespread across party lines. Keep trying to come up with excuses to say otherwise.

Edited by Christopher Walker
  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hence why Denton voters also overwhelmingly approved a $100M bond package this cycle, 70% of which address roads, drainage, and storm sewers.

And the legal warchest already has a foundation. $4M has already been set aside in preparation for the challenges ahead.

Ah, looks like someone has been reading the industry press releases which feature completely fabricated factoids.

http://rodenfordenton.com/2014/11/did-a-college-town-ban-fracking/

Sorry bud, what you're saying just isn't true and there would be no way of knowing either way. Ballots are secret for a reason.

The fact of the matter is that the permanent residents of Denton passed the ban in large margin and widespread across party lines. Keep trying to come up with excuses to say otherwise.

Ever heard of exit polling? Not always accurate to a percentage point, but pretty close..

The thing is this is just another in a long line of Denton decisions that give it an anti-business reputation.

Compare Fort Worth and youu find a VERY can do city that is business friendly with a positive reputation for getting things done..

Denton continues to make itself the city of no, which is apparently what the voters want. Just don't be surprised to wake up and find that you have become South Arlington one day in the near future.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I see your point UNT90, there is also a long history of cities with friendly business reputations for "getting things done" that have long-term negative consequences for their people. I don't want to generalize but this is a football forum and a thread on a message board so I will.

There is a precedent for businesses to benefit from "business-friendly" cities, using up the resources, then leaving when it dries up. The citizens are left with the consequences. In this particular case I think it was excellent weighing of the costs (unknown long term damage to kids, health that costs big $$) vs the benefits (1% of Denton economy + some vague sense of attractiveness to monolithic "business").

Given that Denton has a growing tech reputation, I think this ban serves two purposes -- protecting health, and also creating a positive environment that a certain kind of person wants to live an work in.

  • Upvote 8
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So much misinformation. Wondering why this was started in the football forum when there was another thread on this topic already in the proper area?

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

So much misinformation. Wondering why this was started in the football forum when there was another thread on this topic already in the proper area?

Don't know? Why don't you ask the owner of the board, who happens to be the one that started the topic in this forum.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know? Why don't you ask the owner of the board, who happens to be the one that started the topic in this forum.

You really don't have a clue.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

That seems to have worked real well for the Republicans nation wide. It's nice to see that at least one community in America is not fooled by that sort of thing.

Lol. Keep telling yourself this if it makes you feel better.

Truth is, Pres. Obama is no different than any other second term President in mid term elections. Americans are sick of him and his party, so the other side wins. Democrat or republican, this is the case:

It has nothing to do with anyone "fooling" anyone and it's not some great mandate for the Republican Party. It's simply an unpopular president being taken to the woodshed by a public weary of him and his party.

See George W. Bush as an example.

Edited by UNT90
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought everyone loved the Obama and his change...

Problem is, when he had a super majority in the Senate, the only thing that concerned him was a political health care tax, one of the biggest tax increases in history. At a time when the economy was complete crap. And a tax increase that was hugely unpopular with the American people.

If the republicans hadnt been complete morons and nominated someone besides a guy who had implemented the exact same tax as a governor, they would have mopped the floor with Pres. Obama in 2012 and he would have been a one term president.

Edited by UNT90
Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason Romney supported the Mass heath care initiative as governor was because it was a good idea. It was still a good idea when Obama signed the national version into law. Conservatives have been wrong about every big issue in the last half-century - e.g., social security, civil rights, & the environment. They're wrong about health care too.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.