Gas drilling debated, discussed in Norwich June 16, 2011

Gas drilling debated, discussed in Norwich

By: Melissa deCordova, Sun Staff Writer (Evening Sun)
Published: June 17th, 2011

NORWICH – Yesterday afternoon’s meeting of a regional natural gas group to discuss government regulations on road use and pipeline infrastructure went off without a hitch despite a large crowd of anti-gas drilling activists who attended and later proceeded to rally in West Park afterwards.

The approximately 85 attendees at the County Office Building meeting were given a set of guidelines and asked to sit in designated areas for government officials, department directors, regulators, the general public and the press. Following a presentation from four speakers, Chenango County’s economic development consultant within the natural gas industry, Steven Palmatier fielded questions first from municipal leaders and from the public second.

Responding to a question from Adrian Kuzminski, moderator for a network of environmental Otsego County activists, who suggested that the group should be discussing the dangers of hydraulic fracturing and threats to the state’s drinking water supplies, Palmatier said the meeting was “not intended nor ever intended to be a debate of hydraulic fracturing.”

“We are dealing with the regulatory structure for our county to deal with the natural gas industry we have and to prepare for what we could have in the future,” he said.

Coventry resident Kim Michels asked about right-of-way set backs and surface and subsurface rights, particularly as they pertained to a natural gas pipeline company currently seeking a franchise in the towns of Sidney, Bainbridge and Coventry. A planning consultant, Chris Kale, asked about New York Department of Environmental Conservation set back requirements that she said don’t comply with Federal Housing Administration title insurance requirements and is causing problems in the secondary mortgage market.

At the rally, Kuzminski characterized the multi-county meeting as “outrageous” and told the about 40 in attendance, “I hope you don’t let them get away with that.”

“It’s important to work on the federal level, important to work on these issues in Albany, but we probably aren’t going to get bailed out by either. The only place to make things happen is on the ground level, through grassroots efforts like this. We have leverage at the local level,” he said.

Other speakers called for a complete ban on high water volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing, a 60-year-old energy stimulation technology that uses high-pressure water mixed with chemicals and sand to crack open shale formations.

Town of McDonough Supervisor Arrington Canor, one of eight elected officials who attended the Regional meeting, said not knowing the facts about natural gas drilling is making people afraid.

“We aren’t here to argue. We officials need to know what the rules are and how we can work within them. It’s the only industry that we have that is promising jobs. We’re not hear to argue. We’re here to get the facts,” he said.

One of the meetings speakers, Gregory H. Sovas, of XRM, LLC, said the practice would require very minimal land disturbance. He pointed to the estimated 15,000 to 18,000 jobs that would be generated in the Southern Tier by 2015 if the state allows gas companies to drill into the massive Marcellus Shale formation.

“I get emotional even thinking about the landowner. Who is speaking up for them? I get emotional when others tell landowners what to do with their land,” he said.

The pending natural gas industry is also expected to result in $11.4 billion in economic output by 2020 and $1.4 billion in tax revenues for state and local governments over the next nine years.

The DEC is preparing to release an environmental impact statement in July that would outline new permit guidelines for natural gas exploration using horizontal drilling combined with hydraulic fracture stimulation.

Caroline Council Tables Resolution

The Marcellus Effect: Caroline Council Tables Resolution.

Video by Cris McConkey.  CC Attribution/Non-commercial. Playlist duration ~ 3-1/2 hrs: Rally; Privilege of the Floor and Reading of Resolutions; Presentations; Public Hearing; Vote on the resolutions.  Downloads.

SUMMARY BY SANDY PODULKA
Brooktondale Community Center, June 14, 2011

Two hundred or more people attended a Caroline Town Board meeting about a resolution to prohibit the Town from taking any action to enact a ban on hydraulic fracturing. Two of the three proponents of this resolution (Toby McDonald and Pete Hoyt) have gas leases and a third (Linda Adams) is the head of the Tompkins County Landowners Coalition. Of the 40 people who spoke, 35 were against the ban and 5 were for it. Since the resolution was apparently in response to the news that local citizens had gathered more than 900 signatures on a petition asking the Town Board to ban high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the Town, many people stated their anger that the board was trying to stifle democracy. Many pointed out the conflict of interest issue, as well, and some asked board members with conflicts to recuse themselves from any vote on this issue. Another theme was the preservation of Caroline as a safe, tranquil community. People asked the Town Attorney, Guy Krogh, and Town Board not to put the avoidance of a lawsuit higher than protecting residents. Guy Krogh indicated that a ban might be possible if crafted carefully and thoughtfully after much analysis of state law. Most of the speakers did a very good job of voicing the concerns of Caroline residents who were dismayed that this resolution popped up on June 7. Local attorney David Slottje, of the Community Environmental Defense Council, spoke eloquently and passionately against the resolution. It was tabled at about 10:45 PM.


PRIVILEDGE OF THE FLOOR and READING OF RESOLUTIONS

Supervisor Barber opens Priviledge of the Floor; Comment on resolution before board in support of New York State Senata and Assembly bills S.3472 and A.3245 “home rule” 0m0s
Comment regarding statement made by town’s attorney at the April 12th board meeting in regard to Adams’ and Hoyt’s resolution. 2m36s
Response by Councillor Hoyt and reading of pertinent parts of the minutes which were not approved in a timely fashion to notify the public. 4m41s
Reading of resolution is support of 90-day public comment period after DEC promulgates new rules upon completion of its review of the SGEIS follwed by discussion and vote. 8m8s
Introductory remarks regarding Public Hearing 12m24s
Reading of resoution “Clarifying the town’s role regarding gas development based on current Environmental Conservation Law” 18m02s
Reading of Resolution in support of A.3245 / S.3472 19m15s

PRESENTATIONS

Linda Adams, Town Councillor 0m0s
Bill Podulka, Resident and Chair, Residents Opposed to Unsafe Shale-Gas Extraction (ROUSE) 3m51s
David Slottje, Attorney with Community Environmental Defense Council 12m49s
Guy Krogh, Attorney for Town of Caroline 26m18s
PUBLIC COMMENT

1-9 Public addresses Caroline Town Board

1 Pat Brhel 1m47s
2 Sandy Podulka 4m25s
3 Jim Raponi 7m40s
4 Ann Boehm 9m52s
5 Bendidt Pauli 13m44s
6 Anna Gibson 18m31s
7 Elisa Evett 19m56s
7a Councillor Linda Adams 23m57s
8 Karen L. Allaben 26m06s
9 Rita Rosenberg 28m20s

10-18 Public addresses Caroline Town Board

10 Kim Knight 0m0s
11 Irene Weiser 2m12s
12 Todd Schmit 7m02s
13 Tony Tavelli 9m32s
14 Bruce Murray 14m33s
15 Rebecca Dewit 17m05s
16 Michele Brown 20m42s
17 David Kauber 22m20s representing Steve Kress & Elissa Wolfson
18 Nelly Farnum, former Town Councillor 25m36s

19-27 Public addesses Caroline Town Board

19 Jonathan Comstock 0m0s
20 Bert Cooley 3m37s
21 Mary Alyce Kabler 10m52s
22 Leanne Avery 14m25s
23 James Burlitch 17m46s
24 Elliot Swarthout 20m01s
25 John Reed 21m30s
26 Frank Verret 22m14s
27 John Confer 26m16s

28-39 Public addresses Caroline Board

28 Sue PK 0m0s incomplete
29 Milt Taam 1m51s
30 Cyrus Umrigar 5m12s
31 Glen Robertson 9m13s
32 Picilla Timberlake 10m28s
33 Aaron Snow 13m12s
34 Bob Andeson 14m55s incomplete
35 Barbara Lynch 15m34s
36 Ellen Harrison 16m57s
37 Phillip Shapiro 20m20s
38 Bill Crispell 22m31s
39 Beth Hollier 25m09s

Public Discussion on Resolutions and Vote by Board duration: 18m57s

 

Bainbridge Residents Weigh In On Natural Gas Pipeline | WBNG-TV: News, Sports and Weather Binghamton, New York | Local

Bainbridge Residents Weigh In On Natural Gas Pipeline | WBNG-TV: News, Sports and Weather Binghamton, New York | Local.

 

 

Bainbridge Residents Weigh In On Natural Gas Pipeline

By Jenna Hanchard

June 14, 2011 Updated Jun 14, 2011 at 11:05 PM EDT

Bainbridge, NY (WBNG Binghamton) More than 100 people crowd into the Bainbrige Town hall to weigh in on a proposed natural gas pipeline.

The Leatherstocking Gas Company wants to build a pipeline that would run through Sidney, Coventry and Bainbridge.

The company is based in Sidney and wants to obtain public utility status.

The Village of Sidney has already signed off on the plan, but it has yet to go to a vote in Coventry or in Bainbridge.

Many who spoke up in support of the pipeline say the plan would create jobs and economic opportunities for the area.

Those against the plan fear the possibility of the company using eminent domain to build the lines and that constructing this pipeline will pressure lawmakers to give hydrofracking the go ahead.

“I’d like to see natural gas available as a competition to the oil. Oil is driving us out of our home. My heating bill next year is probably going to be like five thousand dollars, ” says Jay Campbell.

“Its problematic because its an underhanded attempt to invest millions of dollars and then say to our state assembly and state senate ‘we’ve put this in we’ve made this investment, you have to okay fracking,” says Patrick McElligott.

Both the town and the company reiterate that Leatherstocking does not have the right to use land belonging to residents for this project.

The town of Bainbridge will revisit the company’s plan at its next meeting to determine how it will move forward.

Caroline confronts gas-drilling option | Press & Sun-Bulletin | pressconnects.com

Caroline confronts gas-drilling option | Press & Sun-Bulletin | pressconnects.com.

Caroline confronts gas-drilling option

Measure seeks ban on hydraulic fracturing

Comments
Ads by Pulse 360
New Policy in New York
Drivers with no DUIs may be eligible for $9 per week car insurance.
Globe Life Insurance
$1* Buys $50,000 Life Insurance. No Medical Exam – Official Site
InsuranceFor1Dollar.com
$39 Auto Insurance?
Special Online Rates As Low As $39 a Month From Top Firms. Free Quotes
AutoInsurance.Insure.com

The Town of Caroline has a resolution on Tuesday’s meeting agenda that, if passed, would stop the town from taking action to ban hydraulic fracturing in the town.

The resolution comes as more than 900 residents have signed a petition calling on the town ban the gas-exploration technique in Caroline.

Supervisor Don Barber said the board is divided on the issue. The piece of legislation is a resolution, which is not subject to a public hearing, but the board is welcoming public comment on Tuesday evening, Barber said.

Barber said he will wait to hear from the public before officially taking a position, but said he’s inclined to vote against the resolution.

“The role of local government is to represent the people and listen to them speak and to protect them. Whenever a town board takes a position that is going to limit debate and is going to limit the options it has available, I think that’s a bad move. So unless I hear something very compelling, I will be opposing the resolution,” Barber said.

At a previous meeting, it appeared that the resolution had enough support to pass, Barber said.

Towns and cities throughout New York have created organizations and events aimed at raising awareness about the potential dangers and unknowns of hydraulic natural gasoline extraction, or “fracking.”

“Momentum to ban gas drilling by local rule has been building across Tompkins County and the state as people learn more about the problems created by gas extraction via hydraulic fracturing,” Bill Podulka, coordinator of the local activist group ROUSE (Residents Opposing Unsafe Shale-Gas Extraction), said in a statement. ROUSE is leading the door-to-door and online petition drive and encouraging any residents who haven’t signed to do so before the meeting at www.rouse-tc.org/car.

Board members Linda Adams and Peter Hoyt authored the resolution.

The meeting is expected to be packed with residents wanting to speak about the resolution; some favor the form of gas exploration, others are deeply opposed. Anti-fracturing legislation has come up in a number of neighboring municipalities, including Dryden and Ulysses. The cities of Oneonta and Buffalo have passed bans on fracturing, as well.

The Caroline Town Board meeting will start at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Brooktondale Community Center because the town hall wasn’t a large enough venue.

Tompkins town drilling regulations | The Ithaca Journal | theithacajournal.com

 

Tompkins town drilling regulations | The Ithaca Journal | theithacajournal.com.

Tompkins town drilling regulations

 

Town drilling regulations

Here’s a look at the actions related to gas exploration adopted and under review by Tompkins County towns.

Ithaca: Adopted Road Excavation Law; Studying Road Use Preservation Law; Considering Critical Environmental Areas Legislation; Considering a zoning law to ban gas drilling in the town.

Dryden: Added industrial noise ordinance to new zoning code: Considering a zoning law to ban gas drilling in the tow:; Considered Critical Environmental Areas Legislation; Considering a zoning law to ban gas drilling in the town: Considering Aquifer Protection Ordinance; Contract with engineering firm to conduct Road Use Assessments for possible Road Use Preservation Law.

Lansing: Conducting Road Assessments with highway staff for Road Use Preservation Law.

Ulysses: Considering a zoning law to ban gas drilling in the town: Created a Citizen’s Advisory Board on Gas Drilling: Contract with engineering firm to conduct Road Use Assessments for possible Road Use Preservation Law: Funding stream monitoring by the Community Science Institute for water quality data: Passed legislation prohibiting town water from being used for gas drilling purposes.

Enfield: Adopted Road Excavation Law: Conducting citizen survey on attitudes toward gas drilling: Considering contract with engineering firm to conduct Road Use Assessments for possible Road Use Preservation Law.

Groton: The town is considering a road use assessment, and citizens are forming a landowners’ consortium to negotiate with drilling companies regarding leasing.

Newfield: Adopted Road Excavation Law: Contract with engineering firm to conduct Road Use Assessments for possible Road Use Preservation Law;

Danby: Adopted Stormwater Management Law: Adopted Road Excavation Law: Contract with engineering firm to conduct Road Use Assessments for possible Road Use Preservation Law: Working with first-responders to prepare for gas drilling accidents/emergencies: Researching possible noise/light protection ordinances: Considering Critical Environmental Areas Legislation: Citizens preparing petition for gas drilling ban.

Caroline: Adopted Road Excavation Law: Considering conducting Road Use Assessments for Road Use Preservation Law.

Two Caroline Town Board members, Linda Adams and Peter Hoyt have placed a resolution on the agenda of the June 14 board meeting that would prevent the town from taking any action to prohibit high-volume hydraulic fracturing.

Gas storage plan must be stopped | Star-Gazette | stargazette.com

Gas storage plan must be stopped | Star-Gazette | stargazette.com.

My husband, Bill, and I have attended several recent meetings dealing with the potential use by Inergy Corporation of depleted salt mines at the U.S. Salt Company in Watkins Glen for the storage of liquefied petroleum gas.

As some of us have learned more about the potential for damage that looms over our beautiful Finger Lakes, a groundswell has begun. The Watkins Glen High School auditorium was filled to overflowing at the meeting on April 14. Although Inergy had been invited to attend this meeting, it chose instead to sponsor one of its own the previous evening at the Community Center in Watkins Glen. It, too, drew a large crowd — but alas, questions from the audience were not entertained.

By the time the second meeting was over, we were struck by this fact: The speakers at the second meeting at the high school volunteered their time to protect our communities. Speakers included Cornell University and Hobart and William and Smith professors who have studied the properties of Seneca Lake for many years and are gravely concerned about the potential effect of the gas storage proposal. The speakers the night before at the Community Center represented a huge corporation whose goal, of course, is profit. For the most part, although they insisted they were our “neighbors,” their homes are far from here.

Subsequent informational meetings were held for concerned citizens at the Damiani Winery and at Glenora Wine Cellars.

The emerging information is terrifying if you love the Finger Lakes for its vineyards, for its lakes, for its rolling farmland and for its unmatched beauty and quietude. This project has the potential to change the entire nature of the region.

It only became clear in the last several months what Inergy’s plans entail. Although at its meeting it highlighted only two caverns to be used for storage of LP gas, that alone would create the need for a 14-acre brine pond it proposes building at the junction of Routes 14 and 14A. But there are many more depleted caverns under U.S. Salt, and Inergy has been quoted as bragging that this site will become the gas storage hub of the entire Northeast.

As one speaker asked at Glenora — and I paraphrase, “Why would we risk losing the millions of dollars in tourist trade that we have worked so hard to attract? Why would we risk all the jobs of the people employed by that industry? Why would we risk pollution of the waters of beautiful Seneca Lake that supplies drinking water to 100,000 people? Why would we risk having our wells polluted by leaking gas? Why would we risk having our property values plummet? And why would we face the risk of a catastrophic accident that could take lives and force us from our homes?”

We think now that the only way we will be able to delay or stop the initiative that Inergy proposes is if residents of our beautiful Finger Lakes say, “No, we do not want to become the hub of gas storage in the Northeast!” We want preserve our land for the rest of our lives, and for the lives of our children and grandchildren.

Moffett is a Watkins Glen resident.

Otsego Town Board Asserts Local Control of Land Use

PRESS RELEASE/PRESS RELEASE/PRESS RELEASE

Fly Creek, NY, 11 May 2010–The Otsego Town Board voted 4-1 tonight to
clarify a long-standing prohibition against heavy industry, including
fracking for natural gas, in the town’s land use law. By this vote the town,
which includes most of the Village of Cooperstown, reaffirmed its home rule
right to prohibit uses not permitted by local ordinances.

Though many towns in New York State have similar limitations on permitted
uses on the books, pro-drilling advocates, pointing out that the gas
industry is exempt from local regulation, have argued that towns have no
authority at all over natural gas extraction.

The Town of Otsego action leaves it to the state’s DEC to regulate gas
drilling when and where it may occur, but reserves the home rule right to
determine in the first place whether such a use should be allowed or
prohibited in the town. In this case the answer was a resounding NO.

It is the first rural town in New York State to explicitly invoke its home
rule authority to block gas drilling as a type of undesirable heavy industry
incompatible with the town’s comprehensive plan. The town acted in response
to the overwhelming sentiment of the enrolled voters in the town opposed to
gas drilling and heavy industry, documented through petitions and surveys as
well as testimony at privilege of the floor and at a public hearing.

A number of other towns in Otsego county and across the state are
contemplating taking similar steps. This grassroots resistance to natural
gas extraction is a remarkable phenomenon. Local citizens are saying no to
fracking for natural gas directly in their communities as too dangerous and
costly and destructive to be tolerated. It is time for state and federal
officials to take notice.

 

 

From Jim Endicott