AURORA | It has been more than a month since the Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission greenlighted a controversial fracking operation less than a mile from the Aurora reservoir, but community advocates opposed to the project believe that they haven’t exhausted their options to halt it.
The State Sunlight-Long wellpad, on the Lowry Ranch property at the southeast edge of Aurora, was approved in a 3-2 vote by the state commission in April. SM Energy, formerly Civitas, is behind the project.
For the past two years, there has been ongoing opposition to Lowry Ranch oil and gas development projects, including the Sunlight-Long well pad, stemming from community concerns over environmental and health impacts to nearby neighborhoods.
Now, community advocates say that a recent change in configuration of the wellpad warrants a more thorough and public review. Save the Aurora Reservoir ,or STAR, a neighborhood collective formed in opposition to the project, says the change to the plan warrants a re-examination by the Arapahoe County Commission.
Andrew Pinkowitz, a member of STAR and an Arapahoe County resident, told Sentinel Colorado that the group is circulating a petition to persuade the commission to hold a public hearing on the change.
“The Lowry (Comprehensive Area Plan) was passed by administrative approval by a single, unelected county official without any public hearing,” Pinkowitz says. “Despite what (SM Energy and the county) have said, there is a blatant lack of transparency, which has been troubling.”
Pinkowitz said he first became engaged with the community advocacy group because of his young son.
“I’m so fired about this because I’m fighting for my son’s future,” Pinkowitz says. “He’s a voracious reader, and we are currently loving The Lorax. I am seeing so many parallels between this book and what is happening now in Aurora. I am fighting for my son’s ability to drink clean water and breathe clean air. SM Energy is fighting to line their pockets as much as possible.”
Members of STAR announced the petition drive at a press conference last week, saying they aim to collect 3,000 signatures to demonstrate “considerable community interest.”
There is no formal process for the petition drive, and it would have no legally binding requirements for the county commission, but STAR hopes it will get the attention of county officials.
“From my perspective, the commission and the regulatory board have so far just rubber-stamped these types of oil and gas proposals with no real consideration for the impact on people’s lives,” Pinkowitz remarks. “Their primary objective has been to maximize the stakeholders, like SM Energy and other developers, rather than the health and well-being of Arapahoe County residents.”
Pinkowitz also alleged that the community group’s voice has been suppressed at recent county commission meetings. The Board of County Commissioners has limited the number of people from a group who can comment at the meetings, a move that STAR believes is a direct result of their activism.
A spokesperson for the county claims that the commission has always limited the amount of time people are given at board meetings, but officials did not address the restrictions placed on the number of people speaking.
The county did limit the number of speakers at an April meeting for public comment. According to Arapahoe County, it does not “generally hold a public hearing on Oil and Gas applications submitted for administrative approval unless elevated to a Use by Special Review by the Director of Public Works and Development…”
As to changes in the Sunlight-Long development, they were approved by an administrative official in the Office of Public Works and Development after the county set forth its guidelines for oil and gas regulations, county officials said.
Jill McGranahan, a spokesperson for Arapahoe County, told the Sentinel that the county had already publicly reviewed the application under its oil and gas regulations.
“Arapahoe County understands that deep concerns remain with some residents about the County’s approval of the Sunlight/Long project,” McGranahan says, adding that the county takes those concerns seriously and “appreciates the time community members have invested in this issue over several years.”
McGrahanan said the independent review process by the Energy and Carbon Management Commission in April approved the plan and that the application approved by the state included “information responsive to state requirements that were separate from county requirements and therefore does not require the County to reopen its prior decision.”
McGrahanan did acknowledge that the county could revisit the proposal, but she did not point to specific criteria that would prompt a reevaluation.
“Based on presently available information, the county will not be reopening the matter,” McGranahan said. “ To the extent minor modifications for the approved application may be required by the Land Development Code in the future, the County will continue to faithfully enforce its criteria to ensure the health, welfare, and safety of our residents.
The county says it will continue to monitor and conduct oversight and enforcement of safety and environmental regulations. Additionally, the county encourages residents to stay up-to-date on information through its Oil and Gas Inspection Program page that is available online.
In their most recent June hearing, the ECMC approved another oil and gas development plan that is part of the Lowry Ranch proposal. The management commission has approved each plan that is part of the Lowry Ranch project thus far.
STAR has posted their petition on their website. Aiming for around 3,000 signatures, community advocacy group members say they hope it will demonstrate considerable and persistent public interest.