Letter: A74 the real danger on ballot
On Oct. 21, Mike Knox, speaking as an employee of the oil-and-gas industry, asked us to vote “no” on Proposition 112 because it’s far too extreme for Colorado. Then he goes on to talk about protecting Colorado “… from special interest groups that put their own agendas ahead of the well-being of our great state …”
Mike, this is blatant hypocrisy. It may be that Prop. 112 is too blunt an instrument to regulate setbacks from oil wells. It might be. But as a response to Prop. 112 your precious oil-and-gas industry sponsored Amendment 74, which purports to amend the state constitution to protect private property owners. What it actually does is prevents any state regulation that might affect free market property values.
Improve a highway past a residential property which increases noise and negatively affects the property value? The owner can sue. Want to change the oil and gas regulations? If they’re more lenient, the surrounding property owners can sue. If the changes are more stringent, the mineral owner can sue. Ordinary property owners can’t play in this sandbox. This is all about oil and gas getting whatever it wants.
There are plenty of other examples where regardless of what change the state makes, one side or the other will be able to sue. And guess who pays when the state loses, you do.
Amendment 74 is a bonanza for attorneys and will be a disaster for most citizens in the state. It’s the most egregious example of a Colorado constitutional amendment pushed by Mike’s bad guys — “… special interest groups that put their own agendas ahead of the well-being of our great state…”
Mike, the oil and gas industry in spending $40 million of out-of-state money plus millions more that aren’t disclosed. Isn’t that the very definition of “…a special interest group that puts their own agenda ahead of the well-being of our great state…”?
Please vote “no” on 74.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.