Eastern Sandoval Citizens Association

Regulating Oil and Gas Operations in the Albuquerque Basin: Slow Down and Get it Right

In response to the SandRidge Energy request to allow oil and gas drilling on 2 acres in Rio Rancho Estates last year, Sandoval County and Rio Rancho are working to enact Oil and Gas Ordinances. The County has published a “bare bones” Draft Ordinance. It has had two public meetings and received many comments from the public and from the Oil and Gas Industry. An updated Draft is proposed to go to the Planning and Zoning Commission next month. That’s too fast. Most participants, including people from the Oil and Gas Industry have urged the County to slow the process down and get it right.

The proposed SandRidge site was on 2 acres in Rio Rancho Estates, part of the 55,000 acres in Sandoval County AMREP leased out for the purpose of exploring for, developing, producing and marketing oil and gas. These 55,000 acres sit atop the Albuquerque Basin Aquifer, the sole source of water for most residents in southern Sandoval County and an important source of water in Bernalillo County.

Although the SandRidge request was withdrawn, there will be future requests to drill, because the financial stakes are high. AMREP was paid approximately $1,000,000 upfront for this oil and gas lease, and will receive 14 percent of the proceeds from produced oil or gas. When the next wells find producible oil or gas, and when the price of oil and gas rises, an oilfield of 1000-2000 wells could spring up in the Rio Rancho area. Such a large well field would have large impacts beyond the Rio Rancho area.

Sandoval County has enlisted the help of New Mexico Tech to provide guidance on the geological and water resource issues of oil and gas drilling. However, the presence of a large oilfield will have impacts on many other issues including but not limited to the effects on:

Air pollution

Water use and pollution

Tourism

Traffic

Real estate values

Property taxes.

Law enforcement and fire response resources

County budget

Financial impacts of possible County Liability

Impact of a large number of outside workers coming into the area.

Before Sandoval County proceeds further with ordinance development, the County should undertake an Impact Analysis of Oil and Gas Operations in the Albuquerque Basin. The County needs to be thoroughly educated about the choices that need to be made to protect the public’s health, safety and welfare, the environment and the public pocket book.

This analysis will help in producing a better Oil and Gas Ordinance and a complete Comprehensive Plan (the overall master plan for Sandoval County).  Currently, the words oil or gas are not even mentioned in Sandoval County’s Comprehensive Plan.

During what needs to be a very deliberative process of developing oil and gas ordinances, which requires investing in economic, water and other impact studies, the county needs to pass a moratorium, with a time limit, on any new oil and gas drilling applications

The Sandoval County Oil and Gas Ordinance is being built under the Precautionary Principle which in essence states:  if there is a chance of harm being done either to people or the environment from an activity and there is not enough scientific consensus or research, then policy makers should err on the side of caution and preclude the activity or heavily regulate it.

It makes sense to slowdown and err on the side of caution.

By Mike Neas – On the upcoming November Election Ballot is another Hospital Mil Levy Question. Should we continue to support two Sandoval County Hospitals with another $110 million for eight more years? Do these hospitals require a continued infusion of $1.125 million every month for another 96 months?

The hospital lobbyists advertise an incredible return on investment. But the fact is that our return on investment is maximized if we stop these payments now. Our return on the first $110 million will continue for years to come just like a good work truck after all the payments have been made. Who continues to make payments after the thing is paid for?
The maximum return on investment was on the first $110 million and would be severely diluted by continuing to make the payments. In fact if we were to double down we would lose the opportunity to invest in other options like infrastructure and education and/or to simply reduce the taxes we pay.

Since the return on the original hospital investment will continue for years and we have the chance to invest in other needed programs which in turn will also return on investment, what sense is there in to putting all of our tax money in a single option? Vote No on the Hospital Tax Question!

The ES-CA board met on September 12, 2016.  Board members present:  EM; Susan Fullas (SF); Bob Gorrell (BG); Chris Daul (CD); and John McNerney (JM).  Members absent:  Lynn Koch and Jerry Saxton.  A quorum was present.

CD reported that the Signpost printed our article for September.  EM noted that he had received an email from KUPR about coordinating calendars with all of the Placitas organizations.  EM will be attending a meeting on 10/6 to discuss.

JM reported on the status of his communication with the State concerning the pipelines.  He noted that one of Enterprise’s pipelines is intrastate, and, therefore, regulated by the PRC.

Dick Ulmer reported that a court hearing was held on 8/5 to review the judge’s prior ruling permitting LPT to be joined as a party to the County lawsuit against Vulcan.  The judge clarified her ruling to allow LPT to participate in matters only concerning the zoning violations charged by the County.  Dick said that the next step will be the sending of interrogatories to the parties as part of the discovery process.

Dick reported that there is now 3 months’ worth of data from the new NMED air monitoring station.  While the data shows contaminant levels to be within the acceptable range, the numbers are above most of the other air monitoring sites in NM.

BG reported that the County has released a draft of the oil and gas drilling ordinance.  However, he believes that it is too stringent for the County to adopt and that there will be changes made before it is presented to the P&Z.

The Placitas Sage Co-housing application will be discussed at a P&Z meeting in September.

BG reported that Congresswoman Michelle Lujan Grisham is expected to introduce legislation in the US House that mirrors the legislation introduced by Senator Heinrich that would prohibit BLM from selling or leasing any land for sand and gravel mining.

The consensus was that the candidates forum was a success and that ES-CA should look to partner with other organizations to co-host the next forum in 2 years.

Upcoming events include the Adopt a Highway Cleanup:  Scheduled for 9/24.  Volunteers are needed.

Membership Appreciation:  Scheduled for 10/16, from 3-5 pm at the Placitas Library.  SF will need volunteers to help.

Next meeting is scheduled for Monday, October 3, beginning at 6:30 pm at the Placitas Fire Station on Rte., 165.  All are welcome to attend.

The ES-CA board of directors met on August 1, 2016. Board members present:  BG; Chris Daul (CD); Susan Fullas (SF); and John McNerney(JM).  Lynn Koch  (LK)  A quorum was present.

Monthly reports were presented.

1. Treasurer’s Report.  SF reported ES-CA had a balance of $18,227.67 as of July 31, 2016, reflecting income from dues of $296.50, interest income of $0.76, and no expenses for the month of July. The LPT balance was $46,714.48, reflecting interest income of $1.97 and no expenses for the month of July.
2. Membership:  Jerry Saxton was absent.  He did send a report to the board after the meeting showing 144 paid members, and 382 current contacts.
3. Communication:  CD reported that the Signpost had published the ES-CA submitted article in the August edition.  He noted that ES-CA would be placing an advertisement in the September issue of the Signpost about the Candidate’s Forum, scheduled for September 10.
4. IT:  No report.
5. Political/Legal:  JM reported that Jodilynn Ortiz was following up on the pipeline issue and had submitted an email to the board.
6. Watchdogs:  LK reported that she had two volunteers ready to attend the last County P&Z meeting.  She noted that calling volunteers was a more effective method that emailing.
7. LPT:  Dick Ulmer reported that the court had scheduled a hearing in order that the judge could reiterate her decision that LPT be joined as a party to the lawsuit by Sandoval County against Vulcan.

Current issues were discussed.

1. Proposed County Ordinances:  BG reported that there has been no public news regarding the proposed oil and gas drilling ordinance.
2. BLM:  BG reported that Senator Heinrich has introduced a bill in the US Senate that would prohibit mining on BLM lands.  He does not know if the bill will ever become law, but it is hoped that the bill may influence BLM to prohibit or severely restrict mining on the Buffalo Tract.
3. Hospital Mill Levy:  CD referenced his Forum post about the work session held by the County Commission on July 20 to discuss this matter.   The Commissioners had instructed the County Manager to prepare a resolution calling for a continued tax of 4.25% for an eight year period.  If approved by the Commission at their August 4 meeting, the question will go on the ballot in November.  Significant discussion ensued led by Steve Barro and Mike Neas, who both oppose any continuation of the tax.  Steve had prepared a document detailing his position.  BG suggested that he submit that document to the County Commission and to the press, prior to the CC meeting and that he and Mike attend the CC meeting to express their views.  Steve was also asked to submit his document to the board and it was subsequently posted in the ES-CA forum.  BG responded to questions about ES-CA taking a position of the tax by noting that ES-CA’s role for now is to monitor governmental actions and note if they are in compliance with existing laws, following procedures, including transparency, and endeavor to inform Placitans of the issues.  Before the November vote, ES-CA may want to put this and other issues to a vote in order to raise awareness and understand the opinions of the membership.
4. Zoning Amendment Request – Placitas Senior Co-housing:  BG reported that the P&Z meeting had been cancelled and this matter will be rescheduled.  BG referenced a poll that was conducted by ES-CA concerning high density zoning and the zone change process.  His opinion is that ES-CA should not take a position concerning this specific application, other than to insure that the process includes interested citizens.  Further, that ES-CA should work with the County to make the zone change process more inclusive and public.
5. Bernalillo and SC Government Update:  CD referenced prior discussion items and noted that he had no new information from Mayor Torres of Bernalillo.
6. Oil and Gas Assoc. Educator:  JM referenced the email from Jodilynn Ortiz and noted that this issue will be followed up on at the next meeting.

Upcoming events include:

Candidates Forum:  Scheduled for Saturday, September 10, from 2-4 pm at the Placitas Senior/Community Center.  Six of the eight invited candidates have responded in the affirmative.  We are following up with the remainder of the candidates.

Member Appreciation Day:  This is scheduled for Sunday, October 16, at the Placitas Community Library.

Next Meeting:  The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, September 10, 2016, beginning at 6:30 pm at the Placitas Fire Station, 463 Highway 165.

By Mike Neas- On August 4th the Sandoval County Commissioners will decide if the Hospital Tax Question will again be asked of the voters in the upcoming November election. This is a very important Ballot Question and Public Comment from now to the election should be encouraged. 480 votes swung the other way on the 2008, 4.25 Hospital mil levy and Sandoval County property tax payers would not have committed to paying over 104 million dollars over an eight year period to one public teaching hospital and one private hospital.

The wording in the tax question itself is arguably responsible for the difference in the 2008 vote count. That question confusingly misrepresented the mil levy duration as not less than 4 and not more than 8 years. The difference being a whopping 52 million dollar additional tax burden and the County Management never even considered the four year possibility when it signed the eight year Sandoval County Health Facilities Agreements.

How long should we supplement the operations of both of these hospitals with more than one million dollars a month of the property tax potential? The hospitals are not available to “…all Sandoval County residents.” as recited in each of their Sandoval County Health Facilities Agreements. Presbyterian Hospital accepts only certain insurances, of which my own Blue Cross Blue Shield is not one. And Presbyterian Health Care has no contract with Sandoval County Regional Medical Center. Can we afford to commit another 104 million dollars over the next 8 years while important Bond Issues fail to pass and County infrastructure and our education system are underfunded?

We now have two modern, well-staffed, medical institutions which are major assets in the future of our County. The hospitals are now established and are important aspects of our Sandoval County health and economic future. The taxpayers have made an important and considerable contribution to a much needed cause. But, we cannot afford another eight years and 104 million dollars to two “most favored” tax money recipients. The money must be spread around. Vote “NO” on the Hospital tax question and vote yes on something else that we need.

These hospitals should not be joined at the hip in a single all or nothing Ballot Question. We might also consider supporting only our public teaching hospital with a 2.125 mil tax levy.