Over two years have elapsed since La Plata County officials first began redrafting the gas and oil regulations contained in chapter 90 of the land-use code. The flare of that process was extinguished Wednesday when the Board of County Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the fourth drafted version of the code.
The newly adopted regulations maintain the county’s position as a leader among Colorado counties in the regulation of the gas industry.
When SB-181 went into effect in 2019, the state reoriented its regulatory philosophy toward the industry from one intended to “foster, encourage and promote” development to a philosophy seeking to protect and minimize adverse impacts to public health, safety, welfare, the environment and wildlife resources.
Despite objections from the industry decrying that regulations adopted at a state level in 2020 were the strictest in the country, La Plata County pursued additional regulatory oversight.
According to SB-181, the rules adopted by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission set a regulatory floor – county regulations may enact further restrictions, but may not be less restrictive.
Specifically, the county’s regulations further restrict the distance that wells can be drilled from certain categories of existing buildings; they also dictate how far certain buildings can be constructed from existing wells, a set of regulations known as “reciprocal setbacks.”
| Setback applies when well is near: | La Plata County minimum setback |
| Property lines if adjacent parcel contains commercial or industrial building or public gathering space | 300 feet |
| Property lines if adjacent parcel contains dwelling unit or high occupancy building | 400 feet |
| Property line with informed consent of neighbors | 150 feet |
| Commercial and industrial buildings | 300 feet |
| Residential or high occupancy building units | 400 feet |
| Reciprocal setbacks | Matches regular setbacks as dictated by use |
County staff and members of the Planning Commission spent the last several months wrestling with how to address the interests of two opposed groups.
Environmentalists have argued that the county should adopt a 2,000-foot setback in most circumstances without any exceptions. Members of the gas and oil industry have said such a regulation would smother future development and harm the county’s tax base as well as the livelihood of some residents.
Public meetings were punctuated by tense interactions between members of the two factions. On several occasions, individuals working in the gas industry heckled environmentalists during public comment or made snide remarks during breaks.
Some landowners have also argued that the reciprocal setback regulations constitute an unreasonable, and some claimed illegal, restriction on the use of private land.
County commissioners dismissed calls for the county to defer to state regulations, arguing that the county still has an interest in exerting local control.
However, at the urging of various interested parties, commissioners did reconsider an initial draft that would have established a 500-foot minimum setback in almost all circumstances.
“I think what we’ve really tried to do is thread a needle here,” said Chairwoman of the BoCC Marsha Porter-Norton. “ … We’ve made a number of adjustments from draft one and, frankly, from the Planning Commission feedback and feedback we’ve heard from the industry.”
Wednesday’s was the 29th meeting on the topic, according to county staff members. Yet, some members of the regulated industry are unhappy about the process.
Michelina Paulek, executive director of the Energy Council, a gas and oil industry trade group, said the process should have begun with a consultation between the county and the industry on what needed to change in the way the industry was regulated.
Instead, Paulek said, the Energy Council was asked for comment on a draft of the table of contents, and then was not consulted until the county released the first draft 10 months later.
“While the county has proudly declared that it has hosted more than two dozen meetings, many being public, we would again note that simply hosting meetings does not substantively address the very real impacts from passing a code such as the one proposed,” she wrote in a comment to commissioners submitted Tuesday. “Nor does it reflect the participation by the regulated community that this code proposal will impact.”
Conversely, an attorney representing San Juan Citizens Alliance, said in an earlier meeting that the process was among the most transparent he had encountered.
County spokesman Ted Holteen said the evolution from draft one to draft four entailed some significant changes.
“Industry is one side, but there was another side that didn’t think (the BoCC) went far enough,” he said. “They had a very difficult decision in trying to balance the interests of two pretty disparate factions with many folks in between.”
As the BoCC neared a vote, Porter-Norton recognized that any decision was unlikely to please all, or even most stakeholders. Rather, she said, the county staff had worked to balance all interests.
The new regulations go into effect Aug. 1 and could be amended or revisited if any oversights are discovered.
rschafir@durangoherald.com
