BILL ANTI-ENERGY ENTITIES FOR LOSSES

Gas Wells anywhere Colorado 

Colorado General Assembly Members and Governor Jared Polis who supported SB19-181, 

are on record for knowingly initiating 

"Takings Without Just Compensation."  

In 2018, Colorado Voters soundly defeated Proposition 112; a proposition presented by anti-energy entities, for a minimum distance requirement for new oil, gas and fracking projects. Colorado's Democrat House and Senate Majority, led by Democrat Governor Jared Polis refused Coloradans vote against 112,  by immediately forming SB19-181; a bill that would push forward anti-energy entities goal of crippling Colorado's Energy Production. 

SB19-181 Sponsors Senator Stephen Fenberg and Representative KC Becker, General Assembly Members who voted YES, and Governor Jared Polis who signed SB19-181 are on record for knowingly initiating "takings without just compensation."                                    
If you are a Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights Owner (GOMRO) who's been denied opportunity to exercise your property rights, and or are realizing a decrease in your royalties due to passage of SB19-181, please know that said "denial" and "royalty decrease" constitute the unlawful action of "takings without just compensation."                                                
GOMRO's were continuously approached by entities who expressed interest in lawfully "purchasing" Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights. But rather than trying to purchase GOMR's, General Assembly Members and Governor Polis deployed SB19-181 to seize (take without compensating) GOMR's.                                                                                                       
Bill supporters liked the fact that SB19-181 was rife with "interferences with property rights." Coloradans are now realizing negative economic impacts of SB19-181. Job losses, devaluation of GOM shares, denied use and physical invasions of private property are just some of the negative economic impacts.                                                                              
Bill supporters refused inclusion of, "Just Compensation" to Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights Owners, conjoining parties, community, County and Tribe.                                         
Because Governor Polis and General Assembly Members were made aware of the possible negative consequences of SB19-181, they charged forward anyway. Therefore, Colorado Property Owners can claim "Governor Polis and General Assembly Members who supported SB19-181, knowingly initiated takings without just compensation."           
GOMRO's, YOU have a right to seek remedy from those on record as responsible for your losses.         
Instead of bitching, name calling and whining, here's a real remedy suggestion: Quietly and politely send SB19-181 Yes voting General Assembly Members and Governor Jared Polis, a bill for your losses. Have your spread sheets available as back up proof of losses.  

___________________________________________________

Notice sent to Colorado General Assembly - March 3, 2019

Please vote  no on SB19-181.  

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019A/bills/2019a_181_01.pdf

STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED and gas mineral extraction areas, only if the Colorado oil and gas conservation commission (commission) has identified a specific area for designation. leg.colorado.gov

Our concerns highlighted: 

Right out of the chute, this bill violates  "Section 21 of article V of the Colorado Constitution requires that the subject matter of a bill be "clearly expressed in its title..." and that the bill contain only one subject. The title must also state the purpose of the bill. This means the title must accurately reflect the substance of the bill without being so broad as to violate the Constitution's single-subject requirement." ​

​

The subject > CONCERNING ADDITIONAL (more than one subject) PUBLIC WELFARE (ambiguous) PROTECTIONS (more than one subject) REGARDING 101 THE CONDUCT (ambiguous) OF OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS (too broad). ​

​

This bill is a list of new regulations; not a singular law. ​

​

"The bill enhances local governments' ability to protect public health, safety, and welfare and the environment by clarifying, reinforcing, and establishing their regulatory authority over the surface impacts of oil and gas development. Current law specifies that local governments have so-called "House Bill 1041" powers, which are a type of land use authority over oil..."​

This is redundant, for "local" - i.e. county -  government's already have such authority. What is the sponsors definition of "enhances?"​

​

If the bill sponsors were sincerely concerned about (II)  THE MINIMIZATION OF ADVERSE IMPACTS TO PUBLIC HEALTH, 23 SAFETY, AND WELFARE, they would enforce preexisting laws that require CDOT and Union Pacific to maintain their easements. ​

​

Additionally, because there are no inclusions respective of honoring and exercising of "preexisting" Gas Oil and Mineral Rights, SB 181 is in reality, a gross violation of private property rights... known in our Colorado State Constitution as "Takings without just compensation." ​

​

A better bill, a single subject bill, would be a: "Full Disclosure of Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights;"  a bill concerning full disclosure of Gas, Oil and Mineral rights by property sellers. Seller must disclose the existence of "preexisting Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights" that may be exercised at any time and are within say 1 mile of property to be sold. Upon purchase of property, buyer waives any rights they may or may not have to sue, protest or otherwise disrupt Gas, Oil and Mineral owner rights to exercise.  Seller's failure to disclose would result in appropriate penalties...​

State of Colorado Constitution

Article V Legislative Department 

Section 40. Bribery and influence in General Assembly. If any person elected to either House of the General Assembly shall offer or promise to give his vote or influence in favor of or against any measure or proposition pending or proposed to be introduced in the General Assembly in consideration or upon condition that any other person elected to the same General Assembly will give or will promise or assent to give his vote or influence in favor of or against any other measure or proposition pending or proposed to be introduced in such General Assembly, the person making such offer or promise, shall be deemed guilty of solicitation of bribery. If any member of the General Assembly shall give his vote or influence for or against any measure or proposition pending in such General Assembly, or offer, promise or assent so to do, upon condition that any other member will give or will promise or assent to give his vote or influence in favor of or against any other measure or proposition pending or proposed to be introduced in such General Assembly, or in consideration that any other member hath given his vote or influence for or against any other measure or proposition in such General Assembly, he shall be deemed guilty of bribery; and any member of the General Assembly, or person elected thereto, who shall be guilty of either of such offenses shall be expelled, and shall not be thereafter eligible to the same General Assembly; and, on conviction thereof in the civil courts, shall be liable to such further penalty as may be prescribed by law.

Article V Legislative Department

Section 43. Member interested shall not vote. A member who has a personal or private interest in any measure or bill proposed or pending before the General Assembly, shall disclose the fact to the house of which he is a member, and shall not vote thereon.

Article IV Executive Department

Sec. 11. Every bill passed by the General Assembly shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the Governor. If he approve, he shall sign it, and thereupon it shall become a law; but if he do not approve, he shall return it, with his objections…(and so on). 

*In 1922, in the most historically important taking decision,1 the Supreme Court extended the availability of takings actions from government appropriations and physical invasions of property, as described above, to the mere regulation of property use. This critical expansion of takings jurisprudence to “regulatory takings” acknowledged that purely regulatory interferences with property rights can have economic and other consequences for property owners as significant as appropriations and physical invasions.

ENFORCE WATER LAW!

Water Rights Owners

Colorado Water Engineers fail to 

Administer Water in Prior Appropriation! 

Help enforce Water Law! 

PLEASE demand your legislators and Governor Polis enforce the following Resolution. 

It's preexisting Water Law. 

Enforcing the Resolution, should only take about an hour. The 2020 General Assembly will not be burdened with committee hearings, testimonies into the late night or fiscal note. 
An alternative action would be to demand Governor Polis do an Executive Order. 

Resolution to reaffirm Water Law 

A Resolution to reaffirm the process by which Colorado Water Rights are to be administered under the statutory laws of the State of Colorado.

Be it hereby resolved by this legislative body, the State of Colorado directs and requires State Water Engineers to administer, distribute and regulate the water of the state in a manner consistent with the rules of the Prior Appropriation system: *“First in time, first in right" or "Prior Appropriation” doctrine is based on *Priority Date and amount, aka *Allotment Quantity,” of both surface water and groundwater tributary to a surface stream.

There has been no law made that extinguished, “first in time, first in right.” Therefore, we wholly defer to C.R.S. 37-92-102 and hereby declare C.R.S. 37-92-102 stand as the policy of the state of Colorado that, in the determination of water rights, uses, and administration of water, the following principles shall apply:

The Legislator finds the language of this Statute to be clear and unambiguous.

This Resolution hereby orders the State Engineer shall apply the law as it is written.

From: C.R.S. 37-92-102 Legislative declaration basic tenets of Colorado Water Law

The Resolution

(2) Recognizing that previous and existing laws have given inadequate attention to the development and use of underground waters of the state, that the use of underground waters as an independent source or in conjunction with surface waters is necessary to the present and future welfare of the people of this state, and that the future welfare of the state depends upon a sound and flexible integrated use of all waters of the state, it is hereby declared to be the further policy of the state of Colorado that, in the determination of water rights, uses, and administration of water, the following principles shall apply:

· (a) Water rights and uses vested prior to June 7, 1969, in any person by virtue of previous or existing laws, including an appropriation from a well, shall be protected subject to the provisions of this article.

· (b) The existing use of groundwater, either independently or in conjunction with surface rights, shall be recognized to the fullest extent possible, subject to the preservation of other existing vested rights, but, at his own point of diversion on a natural watercourse, each diverter must establish some reasonable means of effectuating his diversion. He is not entitled to command the whole flow of the stream merely to facilitate his taking the fraction of the whole flow to which he is entitled.

· (c) The use of groundwater may be considered as an alternate or *supplemental source of supply for surface decrees entered prior to June 7, 1969, taking into consideration both previous usage and the necessity to protect the vested rights of others.

· (d) No reduction of any lawful diversion because of the operation of the priority system shall be permitted unless such reduction would increase the amount of water available to and required by water rights having senior priorities.”

*Supplemental  -well drilled prior to 1969 will have the same priority date as the original surface appropriation and can be used to supplement the surface allotment quantity only up to the adjudicated amount of the original surface appropriation. Any water pumped above the total original surface appropriation amount will only have a priority of the date upon which the well was drilled and put to beneficial use. This was the intent of the State legislature as expressed in this Statute.

*First in time, first in right. An appropriation is made when an individual physically takes water from a stream (or underground aquifer) and places that water to some type of beneficial use. The first person to appropriate water and apply that water to use has the first right to use that water within a particular stream system. This person (after receiving a court decree verifying their priority status) then becomes the senior water right holder on the stream, and that water right must be satisfied before any other water rights can be fulfilled.

*Priority date: “previous, existing, pre-existing, valid, vested and senior water rights.” and amount of surface and groundwater connected, not separate.

The appropriation date of a water right is the earliest date on which the applicant can demonstrate the initiation of the appropriation, and applies to surface and groundwater (conjunctive use) tributary to a surface stream. Surface water and groundwater are connected.

*Allotment Quantity: Assume three water-users exist on a stream system with adjudicated water rights totaling 5 cfs (cubic feet per second). The user with the earliest priority date has a decree for 2 cfs, the second priority has a decree for 2 cfs, and the third priority right has a decree for 1 cfs of water. When the stream is carrying 5 cfs of water or more, all of the rights on this stream can be fulfilled. However, if the stream is carrying only 3 cfs of water, its priority number 3 will not receive any water, with priority number 2 receiving only half of its 2 cfs right. Priority number 1 will receive its full amount of 2 cfs under this scenario.

This process of allocating water to various water users is traditionally referred to as "Water Rights Administration," and is the responsibility of the Division of Water Resources.

Here's the link to C.R.S. 37-92-102 in its entirety. 

https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2016/title-37/water-rights-and-irrigation/article-92/part-1/section-37-92-102/

WATER LAW RESOLUTION

Colorado Water Engineers fail to Administer Water In Prior Appropriation. 

To reaffirm Water Rights, we urge Colorado General Assembly pass this Resolution. 

Whereas, the State of Colorado Constitution guarantees the protection of life and property, and

Whereas water rights are property rights, and

Whereas water is essential to sustain life, and

Whereas the Colorado State legislature has enacted laws to protect property owners in water rights, and

Whereas to prevent breaches of the peace by preventing theft of property through unlawful diversion and conversion of water rights, and

Whereas the Governor and State Engineer are charged to administer water rights, and

Whereas failure to do so violates the State Constitution and is a clear threat to the lives and property of Coloradans,

Therefore, be it resolved that the Governor and State Engineer -

Shall: Enforce State water-law as strictly guaranteed by the Constitution in prior appropriation allowing supplementation of senior surface water rights by use of pre-1969 supplemental wells up to their full appropriation amounts prior to allowing junior owners to pump and divert their water rights. 

C.R.S. 37-92-102 Legislative declaration basic tenets of Colorado Water Law

(2) Recognizing that previous and existing laws have given inadequate attention to the development and use of underground waters of the state, that the use of underground waters as an independent source or in conjunction with surface waters is necessary to the present and future welfare of the people of this state, and that the future welfare of the state depends upon a sound and flexible integrated use of all waters of the state, it is hereby declared to be the further policy of the state of Colorado that, in the determination of water rights, uses, and administration of water, the following principles shall apply:

· (a) Water rights and uses vested prior to June 7, 1969, in any person by virtue of previous or existing laws, including an appropriation from a well, shall be protected subject to the provisions of this article.

· (b) The existing use of groundwater, either independently or in conjunction with surface rights, shall be recognized to the fullest extent possible, subject to the preservation of other existing vested rights, but, at his own point of diversion on a natural watercourse, each diverter must establish some reasonable means of effectuating his diversion. He is not entitled to command the whole flow of the stream merely to facilitate his taking the fraction of the whole flow to which he is entitled.

· (c) The use of groundwater may be considered as an alternate or *supplemental source of supply for surface decrees entered prior to June 7, 1969, taking into consideration both previous usage and the necessity to protect the vested rights of others.

· (d) No reduction of any lawful diversion because of the operation of the priority system shall be permitted unless such reduction would increase the amount of water available to and required by water rights having senior priorities.”

*Supplemental -well drilled prior to 1969 will have the same priority date as the original surface appropriation and can be used to supplement the surface allotment quantity only up to the adjudicated amount of the original surface appropriation. Any water pumped above the total original surface appropriation amount will only have a priority of the date upon which the well was drilled and put to beneficial use. This was the intent of the State legislature as expressed in this Statute.

*First in time, first in right. An appropriation is made when an individual physically takes water from a stream (or underground aquifer) and places that water to some type of beneficial use. The first person to appropriate water and apply that water to use has the first right to use that water within a particular stream system. This person (after receiving a court decree verifying their priority status) then becomes the senior water right holder on the stream, and that water right must be satisfied before any other water rights can be fulfilled.

*Priority date: “previous, existing, pre-existing, valid, vested and senior water rights.” and amount of surface and groundwater connected, not separate.

The appropriation date of a water right is the earliest date on which the applicant can demonstrate the initiation of the appropriation and applies to surface and groundwater (conjunctive use) tributary to a surface stream. Surface water and groundwater are connected.

*Allotment Quantity: Assume three water-users exist on a stream system with adjudicated water rights totaling 5 cfs (cubic feet per second). The user with the earliest priority date has a decree for 2 cfs, the second priority has a decree for 2 cfs, and the third priority right has a decree for 1 cfs of water. When the stream is carrying 5 cfs of water or more, all of the rights on this stream can be fulfilled. However, if the stream is carrying only 3 cfs of water, its priority number 3 will not receive any water, with priority number 2 receiving only half of its 2 cfs right. Priority number 1 will receive its full amount of 2 cfs under this scenario.

This process of allocating water to various water users is traditionally referred to as "Water Rights Administration," and is the responsibility of the Division of Water Resources.

From: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2016/title-37/water-rights-and-irrigation/article-92/part-1/section-37-92-102/