facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Loss of ‘anti-fracking’ issue was a gain for Youngstown



Published: Mon, May 13, 2013 @ 12:00 a.m.

The loss of what was billed as an anti-fracking amendment to Youngstown’s charter was surprising only in its margin of 57 percent to 43 percent. It should have been larger.

That is not a commentary on any perceived nonchalance by Youngstown residents about hazards that may be presented by the hydraulic fracturing process used to extract oil and gas from shale formations deep beneath the earth’s surface.

It is, instead a recognition of at least three things:

The science is still inconclusive as to what those dangers may be. Opponents use anecdotal evidence to claim that fracking is a grave threat to the environment; proponents say elements of fracking have been used for generations with few or no documented cases of a direct link between fracking and, for instance, the contamination of well water. Both sides have distributed widely documentaries supporting their story lines.

The anti-fracking amendment, or Community Bill of Rights, as it was called, went far beyond an attempt to control or ban fracking. Most of the amendment was boiler plate produced by a Pennsylvania environmentalist group that ascribed inalienable rights to people, animals, plants and even fungi. It was so fuzzy in its language that anyone could have seized on one section or another to challenge anyone else’s use of virtually any device or chemical that produced noise, odor or a perceived threat. One section effectively negated zoning by stating that Youngstown residents have “an inalienable right to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes, free from interference, intrusion, nuisances, or impediments to access and occupation.”

It was unenforceable for several reasons. As far as fracking goes, the law in Ohio is well established. The Legislature gave the Ohio Department of Natural Resources sole authority to oversee fracking in the state, unless specifically superseded by the Environmental Protection Agency. The Legislature’s authority to act on issues of statewide importance is provided for in the Ohio Constitution and has been upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court. Of course the charter amendment also purported to place the city outside the reach of either the Ohio Constitution or the U.S. Constitution. Historically attempts to abrogate the Constitution have not gone well (Google “War of Northern Aggression). The amendment was an ideological statement, not a serious piece of legislation.

Even though the 1,300-word amendment would have been unenforceable, had it passed it had the potential to send a message to industry — not just the oil and gas industry — that Youngstown was not a welcoming community. Virtually any action taken by a company or an individual could be challenged under a charter that would have stated, “any city resident shall have the authority to enforce this law through an action in equity” and that the resident would be entitled to damages and legal costs. While the prospect of success under this provision would have been slim, some people would have tried. And many companies would have simply seen no reason to risk the expense of defending themselves against a frivolous suit in Youngstown.

No panacea

The charter was seen, foolishly, as a quick fix to whatever some people thought might ail the city’s environment. There are no quick fixes.

Those who feel that fracking presents a danger to them and their neighbors are going to have to do the hard work of convincing the Legislature that Ohio is so lax as to be courting disaster. There is certainly evidence that the state has not been as contentious as it should have been. Witness its lax oversight of the various D&L companies. One of Ben Lupo’s injection wells most likely precipitated an earthquake while another Lupo operation dumped drilling waste into a storm sewer that connected to a tributary of the Mahoning River.

But such laxity can be corrected without banning an industry that has enormous economic potential. To the extent that it replaces the use of oil or coal with natural gas as a fossil fuel, fracking could even have a positive effect on the environment.


Comments

1Cubbies(37 comments)posted 1 year, 5 months ago

I wonder who wrote this? Betras?Humphries? Mr. Lyden? Any and all CEO's from the local fracking companies? Mr. Lupo? The Advertising Editor of the Vindy?

Just sad.

Suggest removal:

2ytownsteelman(631 comments)posted 1 year, 5 months ago

Sad that the truth is being spoken?

You tried to fool us into buying your piece of garbage. You failed. So climb back into your hole while the rest of us work toward a more prosperous Youngstown.

Suggest removal:

3Cubbies(37 comments)posted 1 year, 5 months ago

Sad that the reason stated in the above editorial was completely flawed in all 3 arguments.

1. Fracking has been done for years without incidents until 2005, when the gas/oil companies got fracking removed from the Clean Air/Water Act. At that point in time the heavy use of toxic chemicals used in the process began. At that point in 2005 we have seen instances of fracking contaminating water.

2.Th amendment was based on the same amendment the Pittsburgh City Council adopted. Are they saying Pittsburgh council members are whack jobs?

3.Similar amendments have been adopted across Ohio. In terms of it being unenforceable, who has ruled on this? No one. We only heard speculations on the parts of lawyers who are involved in making money from fracking leasing contracts.

The Vindy editorial board is simply another business backing business at the expense of the people. The Vindy is no longer the "people's paper",,,it's the business paper.

Suggest removal:

4oh13voter(1205 comments)posted 1 year, 5 months ago

Cubbies,

First, it was the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Second "Fracing" was never regulated under the Act therefore it could not be "removed"
Third, there has never been a proven incidence of fracing causing contamination of water.
Finally, additives have always been used in frac fluid.

Everything you stated is false.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport