Click here to read the Keystone letter:
Grateful?
Yes, because this letter--in just a couple of sentences--perfectly lays out our concerns about the current drilling debate. It begins with the completely false statement that "...activists in Flower Mound [are] seeking to halt all forms of gas exploration and production within the Town limits."
And then the key part.."This activist group is organized and has the support of several thousand residents in the Town, most of which do not own their minerals and would not benefit from the drilling."
And this gets us to the heart of the matter. Should those "thousands" of Flower Mound residents who do not own their mineral rights--Wellington, parts of Bridlewood, the Sanctuary, and many other areas--just acquiesce so that the small percentage of residents, who have sold their mineral rights, can make a buck?
There is a price to be paid for bringing gas drilling and its assorted problems into our neighborhoods. Keystone and the mayor's friends are asking that those of us that either don't own our mineral rights, or those of us that do and choose not to sell them, to pay that price.
Shameful.
The letter ends with a plea from Keystone to vote for the Smith/Robinson/Webb slate of candidates.
I am hopeful that Smith/Robinson/Webb will disavow any affiliation with Keystone or support for this letter.
27 comments:
Pretty sure that Bryan Webb won't be disavowing the letter from Keystone. My understanding is that he made it clear at the Bridlewood debate that he had, in fact, leased his mineral rights to Keystone.
We own our mineral rights and we would benefit $ from drilling. The idea of selling out my town and my neighbors for blood money makes me sick.
We own our mineral rights and we would benefit $ from drilling. The idea of selling out my town and my neighbors for blood money makes me sick.
Amy - you and I personify the key differences in this issue. I have leased my mineral rights and do not in any way feel that I have sold out my town or my neighbors. Nor do I agree with your charcterization of royalties as blood money. Presumably, given your use of the term blood money, you believe that drilling will result in serious health issues for our residents; I do not believe this is true. I certainly would not put my family, friends and neighbors at risk if I thought there was any realistic chance they could get sick from the drilling.
Given that I do not believe that there are serious health risks,I also do not yield the moral high ground to your side, which is trying to infringe on the property rights of mineral owners and the gas companies. If the election swings the leadership of the Town in your direction, and they go too far in restricting property rights, the issue will ultimately be decided in the courts and that will prove very expensive for all the residents of Flower Mound.
Just curious, has anyone asked the candidates themselves if they endorsed the letter from Keystone or even knew anything about it?
In response to Anonymous 9:47pm: There's a fundamental fallacy in your argument:
You state that you don't believe that there are health risks and thus you haven't sold out your town or your neighbors.
What you or I BELIEVE regarding the health risks of urban gas drilling has no relevance to this debate. What matters is whether in 5 or 10 years, serious health consequences--here in Flower Mound--are linked to drilling.
There is credible evidence from those areas west of the Barnett Shale--Colorado and Wyoming, for example, that drilling close to humans does, in fact, have serious health consequences.
Why would you want to risk being someone who had been a part of that?
Anon. 9:47..I am so tired of the threats of court costs. Bring it on. Responsible drilling and No drilling are two differant things.
Interesting that you believe gas drilling does not cause "serious health issues." Personally any health issue I deem serious.
Anon 9:47 PM - so, since it is just a property rights issue for you, will you stand will all of the "minernal owners" who do not wish to sell their minerals? The operators will try to use state government (i.e. the RRC) to force pool unwilling mineral owners. Hmmm, using government to take personal property, who are the Marxists now?
There is far more compelling evidence of health risks associated with emissions from gas-burning engines and from coal-burning power plants than there is from drilling for natural gas. So, how many of you, as a matter of principle, are refusing to use natural gas in your homes? Refusing to use electricity provided by a utility (most of which in Texas comes from burning natural gas or coal)? Refusing to drive vehicles that burn gasoline? Anyone?
I am responding to April 18, 9:47:
I have heard statements often supporting the gas company, just as you did. Why do any of you care about the gas companys profit. It does not matter if you are a mineral owner or not, the gas company does NOT care about you or your royalites. They care about themselves!
I found this quote from the Keystone letter very telling as well: "...most of which do not own their minerals and WOULD NOT BENEFIT FROM THE DRILLING."
Really? I thought we all benefited from drilling! So, it really is just the mineral lessors who benefit. Thanks, Keystone, for stating so clearly what most of us already knew and have been saying for some time.
The flipside, then, is also clearly true: Those who don't sell their mineral rights get none of the benefits, but all the negative repurcussions, including reduced property values. Where is the escrow account that Keystone, Williams and the mineral lessors have set up to compensate the rest of us from their profits?
And where is Citizen Stone when we need him? Doesn't Keystone have to run campaign advocacy efforts and expenditures through a registered PAC? I'm no lawyer, but I think they just violated election laws...
Damn Companies, trying to make a profit, that takes some nerve. It also takes a lot of nerve to debate a topic on speculative grounds. I wish I could get a dollar for every time I read MAY, COULD, POSSIBLY and BELIEVE. Nobody KNOWS, and it is all a matter of opinion. Does anybody actually think that Williams or any other Gas Company's main goal is to inflict harm on the populous to make a dollar? I know that catastrophic liability is not something a company strives for, but to listen to this rhetoric you would think that was their intention. These people have been villanized unfairly, and that goes for the Mayor and her associates also. Equating Royalty Payments to "Blood Money" is about the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. Maybe this definition will help:
Blood money (term), money paid to the next of kin of a murder victim as a fine.
Anon. 12:18..I think you know the answer, but since you asked I will answer. I drive a Volvo. I heat my home with gas. I keep my car in excellant working condition. It has all the greatest safety features. I have a maintenance contract on my heating system & I have carbon monoxide detectors. Is it so wrong and radical to ask that gas companies be diligent with their equipment?
Anon. 12:18 well stated.
Ladd, you are a master with words.
You write what many of us feel.
Anon 3:47 - Sorry, but your answer does not meet the profile of the people I seek. I'm looking for those individuals on the anti-drilling front who believe so strongly in the hazards of natural gas drilling that they refuse to use the product. Who refuse to support coal-fired electric plants by denying their business to a utility. Who will not drive gas-burning cars because the emissions are known to be dangerous to health. If safety is what is truly driving you to resist natural gas drilling, how can you in good conscience use the product?
I rarely agree with Ladd Biro, but perhaps he hit on something in his post when he mentioned the impact of reduced property values. Perhaps money, not safety, is the driving factor for a lot of the folks on both sides of this issue.
Anon 11:02- Everyone in town that owns a home should be concerned about property values. Exactly what do you think pays for city services and schools? I live here. I'm not making any money on my property value.
The specific people you are wanting to have discourse with more than likely do not have internet service.
Anon 8:04 - I suspect my point was too subtle - my fault. I'll make it crystal clear in this post. The specific people that I described who are so devoted to their belief that gas drilling is a health hazard that they refuse to use the product do not exist - at least not among the anti-drilling advocates in Flower Mound. And what does that say about the "true believers" who think that drilling is dangerous to health, yet have no apparent problem heating their water and their homes with natural gas? Is the hypocrisy not obvious?
And what of the good citizens that are concerned specifically with the safety of people in Flower Mound; that before the issues of local gas drilling arose and long after the issues are resolved, did and will happily use natural gas in their homes? Are they not effectively saying that they really don't care about the safety of people in other areas of the country that work in the production of natural gas or live near the facilities?
These supposed safety advocates are either only committed to their beliefs to the extent that they don't impose on their life styles, or, their concern only extends as far as their own family and neighbors - the rest of the county be damned, just supply them with their heat and keep the drilling out of their town.
These people accuse the mineral owners of seeking "blood money". But the mineral owners do not believe the hype about the health risks, so which of these sides is really the morally bankrupt one?
I have far more respect for the anti-drilling advocates that admit they are motivated out of concern for their property values, such as you, Anon 8:04, - at least they are being true to their beliefs.
Anon 12:36- I am not motivated by property value. What motivated me was the CCF rezoning and lack of respect for the hundreds of people that asked for the rezoning to be postponed. If the council had listened to the outcry of the people, many people would not have realized the change in direction our town has taken. Sometimes bad things are really blessings in disguise. I look forward to election day.
On a sidenote, trying to belittle people is not a great way to sell your ideas.
The only "hypocrisy" on display is that of minerals owners who parade around "property rights" and then take a giant dump on everyone else's property rights. Namely, the peaceful enjoyment of our homes, not to mention the right NOT to sell our minerals if we are so lucky to own them. Of course, the RRC will take care of that because they aren't REALLY Republicans they are Gasicans, who give up their Republican beliefs of not using big governemnt to take away private property when there is a lot of money on the line. It's tough being principaled, isn't it. There are a lot of concerns with drilling, fortunately, our side only needs the voter to have ONE of them, to likely vote our way.
"So which of these sides is really the morally bankrupt one?"- the ones who's substative argument is "Shut up you Marxist Liberal"?
Anon 1:54 - You misinterpret my motivation. I am not naive enough to believe that I can "sell" the zealots. I am simply denying them the moral high ground that they take for granted.
Anon 2:07 - Not sure what the rant against Republicans has to do with this issue... don't know what a "Gasican" is... don't know what "being principaled" means, but it sure sounds painful.
Anon 3:12 - I looked throughout this blog and could not find anyone saying "shut up you Marxist liberal", but perhaps I just missed it and you could point it out for us? I actually enjoy it when the anti-drillers open their mouths or attempt to write, so please keep it up!
Tne "Marxist" stuff is being distributed all around Town, try to keep up.
Anon - 11:00. Sorry, but I must not be on the mailing list for the "Marxist stuff". I did take a close look at the three letters that were posted on this blog and seemed to offend the blog host. Here's what I found:
Keystone letter - No mention of Marxists (or socialists, communists, Bolsheviks, etc.).
Balekian/Mizeur letter - ditto.
Stewart letter - Ah ha! Stewart did state that Saul Alinsky was a Marxist (an accusation Alinsky would have denied, although many of his positions were certainly consistent with Marxism - he just didn't like being "typecast"). But Stewart did not say that the anti-drillers were Marxists, just that some of them use tactics promoted by Mr. Alinsky. Very clever positioning on the part of Mr. Stewart. So unless Saul is living in Wellington (not likely since he is reported to be dead) and collected so many petition signatures that he won the use of the suite at the ballpark for a Ranger game, I don't think your statement has validity. Unless of course you can actually produce some of this "Marxist stuff". I believe that the quote we are looking for, as posted by Anon 3:12 is "shut up you Marxist liberal".
I'll say it. Ya'll are a bunch of commie liberals. After we bury you at the election, we are going to drill this town and suck it dry and if you get in our way our lawyers will eat you alive. Just give it up now and save yourself the agony.
anon 10:42.I am to assume you call yourself a Republican. Guess what, I am a Republican too. But you are a disgrace to our party. Do us all a favor...grow up and shut up.
Anon 10:42 - I was tempted to write "nice try", but it really wasn't. Such an emotional rant could only come from the heart of an anti-driller.
Anon - 11:19 PM - Nice try, the voracious attacks have come from your followers such as Shiloh Chris and Patsy and Jan.
Post a Comment