SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Colorado Judge Lets Fracking Trump Public Health
Boulder County district court judge strikes down city of Longmont's fracking ban
Jul 25, 2014
A Colorado district court judge on Thursday invalidated the city of Longmont's fracking ban, a decision celebrated by oil and gas industry and denounced by critics who say it prioritizes the extractive process over public health and the environment.
Longmont made a landmark move in 2012 when voters approved with strong support an amendment to the city's charter to ban fracking.
The vote was promptly followed by a lawsuit by the Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) challenging the ban. State regulatory body Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and locally-operating oil and gas company TOP Operating later joined the suit.
In his ruling, Judge Mallard stated, "The Court is not in a position to agree or disagree with any of these exhibits that support the Defendants' position that hydraulic fracturing causes serious health, safety, and environmental risks."
"While the Court appreciates the Longmont citizens' sincerely-held beliefs about risks to their health and safety, the Court does not find this is sufficient to completely devalue the State's interest, thereby making the matter one of purely local interest."
There is "an irreconcilable conflict" between the city's interest in banning fracking and the state's interest in extraction," Mallard found.
Longmont's fracking ban "impedes the orderly development of Colorado's mineral resources," and is invalid, the ruling states.
The judge also ordered the fracking ban to hold during the time allotted for appeals.
Tisha Schuller, head of COGA, said the decision was "something to celebrate for the industry."
But supporters of the fracking ban have vowed to continue their fight.
"While we respectfully disagree with the Court's final decision, she was correct that we were asking this Court, in part, to place protection from the health, safety, and environmental risks from fracking over the development of mineral resources," stated Kaye Fissinger, President of Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont, one of the intervenors for the city in the lawsuit.
"It's tragic that the judge views the current law in Colorado is one in which fracking is more important than public health; reversing that backwards priority is a long-term battle that we're determined to continue," Fissinger stated.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A Colorado district court judge on Thursday invalidated the city of Longmont's fracking ban, a decision celebrated by oil and gas industry and denounced by critics who say it prioritizes the extractive process over public health and the environment.
Longmont made a landmark move in 2012 when voters approved with strong support an amendment to the city's charter to ban fracking.
The vote was promptly followed by a lawsuit by the Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) challenging the ban. State regulatory body Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and locally-operating oil and gas company TOP Operating later joined the suit.
In his ruling, Judge Mallard stated, "The Court is not in a position to agree or disagree with any of these exhibits that support the Defendants' position that hydraulic fracturing causes serious health, safety, and environmental risks."
"While the Court appreciates the Longmont citizens' sincerely-held beliefs about risks to their health and safety, the Court does not find this is sufficient to completely devalue the State's interest, thereby making the matter one of purely local interest."
There is "an irreconcilable conflict" between the city's interest in banning fracking and the state's interest in extraction," Mallard found.
Longmont's fracking ban "impedes the orderly development of Colorado's mineral resources," and is invalid, the ruling states.
The judge also ordered the fracking ban to hold during the time allotted for appeals.
Tisha Schuller, head of COGA, said the decision was "something to celebrate for the industry."
But supporters of the fracking ban have vowed to continue their fight.
"While we respectfully disagree with the Court's final decision, she was correct that we were asking this Court, in part, to place protection from the health, safety, and environmental risks from fracking over the development of mineral resources," stated Kaye Fissinger, President of Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont, one of the intervenors for the city in the lawsuit.
"It's tragic that the judge views the current law in Colorado is one in which fracking is more important than public health; reversing that backwards priority is a long-term battle that we're determined to continue," Fissinger stated.
A Colorado district court judge on Thursday invalidated the city of Longmont's fracking ban, a decision celebrated by oil and gas industry and denounced by critics who say it prioritizes the extractive process over public health and the environment.
Longmont made a landmark move in 2012 when voters approved with strong support an amendment to the city's charter to ban fracking.
The vote was promptly followed by a lawsuit by the Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) challenging the ban. State regulatory body Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and locally-operating oil and gas company TOP Operating later joined the suit.
In his ruling, Judge Mallard stated, "The Court is not in a position to agree or disagree with any of these exhibits that support the Defendants' position that hydraulic fracturing causes serious health, safety, and environmental risks."
"While the Court appreciates the Longmont citizens' sincerely-held beliefs about risks to their health and safety, the Court does not find this is sufficient to completely devalue the State's interest, thereby making the matter one of purely local interest."
There is "an irreconcilable conflict" between the city's interest in banning fracking and the state's interest in extraction," Mallard found.
Longmont's fracking ban "impedes the orderly development of Colorado's mineral resources," and is invalid, the ruling states.
The judge also ordered the fracking ban to hold during the time allotted for appeals.
Tisha Schuller, head of COGA, said the decision was "something to celebrate for the industry."
But supporters of the fracking ban have vowed to continue their fight.
"While we respectfully disagree with the Court's final decision, she was correct that we were asking this Court, in part, to place protection from the health, safety, and environmental risks from fracking over the development of mineral resources," stated Kaye Fissinger, President of Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont, one of the intervenors for the city in the lawsuit.
"It's tragic that the judge views the current law in Colorado is one in which fracking is more important than public health; reversing that backwards priority is a long-term battle that we're determined to continue," Fissinger stated.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.