Fracking ballot fight draws big bucks | PostIndependent.com

Fracking ballot fight draws big bucks

Leigh Paterson and Jordan Wirfs-Brock Inside Energy
A signature gatherer explains his petition.
Inside Energy

In recent weeks, millions of dollars was spent on a fight over two ballot initiatives in Colorado. Taken together, initiatives 75 and 78 would seriously restrict oil and gas development in the state. The fight is on between those for, and against, the measures. The first battle: signatures.
In order to get a measure on the November ballot, supporters needed to collect and submit 98,492 signatures to the secretary of state by 3 p.m. Monday. Proponents said they met that deadline, and had more than 100,000 signatures.
The state will now confirm the number and vet the validity of the signatures.
Which is why Goodman needed to know: “Are you a Colorado voter?” He was hired to collect signatures by an issue committee sponsored by environmental groups backing the ballot measure.
The interaction with Deborah Larrabee was a typical one. She didn’t initially respond to Goodwin’s question, but then, he dropped the f-word. That stopped Larrabee in her tracks. She is not a fan of fracking, as she told Goodwin before signing both petitions.
The ballot initiatives are actually not about fracking, in the technical sense of the word, but rather about oil and natural gas more broadly. One would give local governments the authority to regulate development. The other would increase the mandatory distance between an oil and gas facility and places like schools, homes and parks from 500 feet to 2,500 feet.
The Colorado Oil and Gas Commission estimates that if the setback measure were to take effect, 90 percent of land in Colorado would be off limits to new oil and gas development. That sort of limitation would affect jobs and revenue. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in Colorado in 2015, about 25,000 people worked in the industry.
Which is why the ballot initiatives have attracted $15.46 million in contributions from those for and against, before even making it onto the ballot.
The contributions have been lopsided, though: Groups trying to keep the measures off the ballot have collected more than 35 times what the groups behind the ballot measures have collected.
Here’s a breakdown of the key numbers as of July 27, based on filings with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office:
• The committees behind the ballot initiatives – Yes For Health and Safety Over Fracking and Yes for Local Control Over Oil and Gas – have collected $424,021. This includes cash donations and non-monetary contributions like services and staff time.
• Half of pro-ballot measure contributions have come from individuals. U.S. Rep. Jared Polis and his father each donated $25,000. Greenpeace, 350.org and Food & Water Watch also made significant contributions, particularly in consulting and staffing.
• Pro-ballot measure groups have spent $250,885 so far. The largest payee is signature-gathering company Localized Strategies. They’ve also spent money on legal fees, printing and advertising.
• The issue committees opposing the ballot initiatives – Protecting Colorado’s Environment, Economy, and Energy Independence (Protect Colorado); Vote No On 75/78; and Coloradans for Responsible Reform – have collected $15,040,665.
• 95 percent of that money has come from oil and gas companies: Anadarko and Noble are the single biggest contributors, donating $5.5 million and $5 million respectively. The Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce also contributed.
• Ballot measure opposition groups have spent $5,059,256 so far; 97 percent of that money has gone to Pac/West, an Oregon-based communications firm.
Pac/West, the largest recipient of the anti-ballot measure money, didn’t return Inside Energy’s phone calls, but Karen Crummy did. She’s the communication director for Protect Colorado, one of the issue committees opposing the ballot measures.
Protect Colorado has paid Pac/West almost $5 million to run its campaign. Crummy said she didn’t know the specifics of how the money is being spent but that it is on the usual stuff such as media, polling and outreach.
“This isn’t just trying to add a new regulation or something. This would wipe out the whole industry,” Crummy said.
Back in Boulder, Chris Goodwin asked Barbara Tyler if she would sign his petitions.
“Fracking?” she said. “Absolutely!”
Tyler lives in Colorado but is from Oklahoma, where the landscape is dotted with wells. Her dad worked in oil and gas, but she is deeply worried about the environmental impacts of fracking. With a sigh, Tyler explains that she “doesn’t want to destroy stuff.”


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.