Residents of Loveland voted against a moratorium on fracing on June 24, the first city in Colorado to do so.

Loveland is the sixth Colorado city to put a halt on fracing to a vote according to the Coloradoan.  The other five—Boulder, Fort Collins, Lafayette, Broomfield and Longmont—have put delays, bans, or restrictions on fracing. Loveland has passed restrictions in the past. According to the Associated Press, the city imposed a moratorium in May 2012 and some “enhanced setback standards” in April 2013.

Ballot Pedia reported that the June 24 ballot was delayed from a proposed November 2013 vote because of a lawsuit filed against the measure. City Spokesman Tom Hacker said more than 20,000 ballots were cast, representing about 50% of registered voters in Loveland. The ballot was defeated by about 900 votes.

According to 9 News, Nick Passanante, a supporter of the moratorium and campaign director of Safe. Clean. Colorado., said, “Today, despite the oil and gas industry outspending local community members by at least $1 million dollars on an election date cherry-picked by the industry, this grassroots effort in Loveland was very nearly passed against overwhelming odds. The industry should certainly be running scared as we head towards the ballot in November.”

Tisha Schuller, President and CEO of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, told 9News, “This is a good example of what happens when voters have access to the facts about hydraulic fracturing and energy development. This ballot measure was about banning energy development, and the people of Loveland embraced cooperation by rejecting this ban.”

According to the Associated Press, Karen Crummy, a spokeswoman for Protecting Colorado’s Environment, Economy, and Energy Independence, said, “The results in Loveland should be a warning to people pushing similar ballot measures across the state.”

“The head of Colorado Concern, an organization of more than 100 CEOs, said the group was encouraged by the Loveland results,” according to the AP.

Opponents of fracing are attempting to pass two statewide ballots. “One would increase rig setbacks from homes from 500 feet to 2,000 feet. The other would create an Environmental Bill of Rights,” according to the AP.

With respect to the setback proposal, The Denver Post reports that Governor Hickenlooper said, “There are so many little homes on little ranchettes that a 1,500-foot setback would eliminate almost 60 percent of the drilling locations.”

[sam_ad id=”32″ codes=”true”]

Important disclosures: The information provided herein is believed to be reliable; however, EnerCom, Inc. makes no representation or warranty as to its completeness or accuracy. EnerCom’s conclusions are based upon information gathered from sources deemed to be reliable. This note is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security or financial instrument of any company mentioned in this note. This note was prepared for general circulation and does not provide investment recommendations specific to individual investors. All readers of the note must make their own investment decisions based upon their specific investment objectives and financial situation utilizing their own financial advisors as they deem necessary. Investors should consider a company’s entire financial and operational structure in making any investment decisions. Past performance of any company discussed in this note should not be taken as an indication or guarantee of future results. EnerCom is a multi-disciplined management consulting services firm that regularly intends to seek business, or currently may be undertaking business, with companies covered on Oil & Gas 360®, and thereby seeks to receive compensation from these companies for its services. In addition, EnerCom, or its principals or employees, may have an economic interest in any of these companies. As a result, readers of EnerCom’s Oil & Gas 360® should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this note. The company or companies covered in this note did not review the note prior to publication. EnerCom, or its principals or employees, may have an economic interest in any of the companies covered in this report or on Oil & Gas 360®. As a result, readers of EnerCom’s reports or Oil & Gas 360® should be aware that the firm may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report.

Legal Notice