Above: New Era Colorado members Henry Kraemer, center, William Truesdell and Molly Fitzpatrick make a toast celebrating the defeat of Boulder Question 310 during a watch party on Tuesday at the Hotel Boulderado. (Jeremy Papasso / Daily Camera)
While money often rules, it does not always rule. In Colorado, a long-fought effort to create a municipal energy utility that would green the energy supply of Boulder won big. This has been a 12 year long effort where the people have defeated the utility repeatedly. Also, fracking bans were enacted by three communities in Colorado, one other will recount after a 38 vote defeat; and one community in Ohio passed a fracking ban imitative These populist initiatives also defeated strong corporate interests that spent a lot of money to protect their financial interests. Deep education of the community were one of the keys to all of these victories in order to overcome the power of corporate money.
Boulder utility clears hurdle as voters reject Xcel-backed Question 310
City Council’s competing debt-limit measure wins approval
Backers of a potential Boulder municipal electric utility cleared a major hurdle Tuesday as voters rejected an Xcel Energy-supported debt-limit measure by a large margin in favor of a competing question placed on the ballot by the City Council.
After all the ballots were counted, the City Council-backed Question 2E passed with 66.5 percent of the vote. The results were nearly reversed for Question 310, with just 31.1 percent of voters casting votes for the measure.
Xcel Energy and Voter Approval of Debt Limits, the group that ran the Yes on 310 campaign, both characterized the vote as a partial victory for their side because the alternative debt-limit measure would not have been on the ballot at all without their efforts.
But municipalization supporters considered the vote a resounding success and said a measure that would have severely hamstrung the utility was defeated.
“We made it really clear that this issue is about our environmental and economic future,” Boulder Mayor Matt Appelbaum said. “This conversation has to continue, and if it can’t continue in Boulder, where can it continue?”
The results represent a boost in support for the utility over the 2011 election, when Boulder voters very narrowly authorized the City Council to pursue municipalization if a utility could meet certain criteria.
Appelbaum said the city “did its homework” to demonstrate the feasibility of the utility, and the voters responded with their support.
‘Time for a little healing’
John Spitzer, a member of Empower Our Future, the pro-municipalization group working against 310, was ecstatic at the results.
“We are pleased that the margin is so large, and it sends a strong message from the community that municipal electric should move forward,” he said. “More than anything, I think it will discourage Xcel from coming back with another so-called citizen initiative next year.”
At the same time, Spitzer said he hopes Xcel and Boulder can work together in a more cooperative fashion in the future.
“I think it’s time for a little healing between Boulder and Xcel,” he said. “Whatever happens, Boulder and Xcel will be working together for the next 30 to 50 years.”
Meg Collins, a member of Voter Approval of Debt Limits, said the results were “a partial win for those of us who want to see voter approval of debt limits.”
“Had we not put Question 310 on the ballot, the city would never have contemplated including the voters in utility debt decisions,” she said.
Xcel Energy spokeswoman Michelle Aguayo said Boulder voters supported the principle of a debt limit for the utility by passing Question 2E.
“While it doesn’t provide the same protections that 310 would have or the same voice for county customers, Boulder voters’ approval of this measure shows that they are giving serious thought to how much debt they are willing to incur in this effort as they are giving city leaders a limit in spending,” she said. “While we supported (Question) 310, we don’t see how the city can acquire Xcel Energy’s electric utility for the $214 million cap set by 2E.”
Appelbaum said the question of acquisition costs will be determined in court, but he believes Boulder will not have a problem buying the system.
As for the question of whether voters would have otherwise supported 310, Appelbaum said the margin makes that interpretation “just not credible.”
“When you lose 2-to-1, that means we don’t want to stop, we don’t want to roll over and play dead,” he said. “That’s clear.”
Competing measures
Question 310 was placed on the ballot through the citizen initiative process, with backing from Xcel Energy. The company provided most of the funding for Voter Approval of Debt Limits, the group running the campaign for the charter amendment.
Question 310 would have required a vote on the total debt limit of the city utility and, if the utility service area extends beyond city limits, would require that affected residents in unincorporated Boulder County be allowed to vote in the debt limit election.
Supporters of a municipal utility said 310 would effectively “kill” the nascent enterprise before it even got off the ground. They said the requirement for another vote would complicate the condemnation process because the city needs to be able to pay at least its opening offer to even file. Holding a vote in the county might require changes to state law. And the debt limit would make it difficult to issue bonds for emergency repairs after a natural disaster.
Backers of 310 said it would have created an important layer of accountability in a political environment where the City Council is strongly pro-municipalization.
The City Council placed Question 2E on the ballot to compete with Question 310. Backers of the utility hoped it would address public concerns about the cost of the utility without putting too many restrictions on debt. It places a $214 million cap on acquisition costs, including stranded costs that would be paid in a lump sum but not including stranded costs that would be folded into rates. Stranded costs would reimburse Xcel for investments in generation capacity that would no longer be needed if Boulder forms its own utility.
Question 2E also provides for county utility customers to serve on the governance board of the utility.
The City Council voted 6-3 in August to move forward toward condemnation of Xcel Energy’s distribution system after finding that the utility would meet those conditions and would provide greener energy at similar or lower rates than Xcel Energy.
However, Boulder is also in talks with Xcel to develop alternatives to municipalization that would still provide carbon reductions and that could be implemented statewide.
Heather Bailey, executive director of energy strategy and electric utility development, said the defeat of 310 and the passage of 2E gives the city the flexibility to continue exploring municipalization while recognizing concerns about total costs.
“The additional requirements set by 2E will address concerns about the unknown amounts of acquisition and stranded costs associated with forming a local utility and help define the path the community would like us to take towards creating the electric utility of the future right here in Boulder,” she said.
Fracking Ban Initiatives Succeed In Three Colorado and One Ohio Communities
Recount is likely ahead for Broomfield, as moratorium fails by 13 votes.
By Joe Eaton
National Geographic, November 6, 2013
Voters in three Colorado cities and one in Ohio on Tuesday passed ballot measures banning or temporarily halting fracking within their borders.
But in the Denver suburb of Broomfield—a location viewed as an active prospect for exploration—a decision hangs in the balance, as the unofficial tally has voters rejecting a moratorium by a razor-thin margin. Broomfield spokeswoman Rosann Doran said a recount is likely, but the results will not be certified for at least a week after overseas ballots are tallied and signatures verified. (Vote: “How Has Fracking Changed Our Future?“)
Advocates of the ballot measures say the wins provide momentum for the national movement to ban hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, the energy industry practice of injecting wells with millions of gallons of water and chemicals to release trapped oil and gas. (Take the quiz: “What You Don’t Know About Natural Gas.”)
But oil industry representatives said the Election Day outcome means little because the cities that halted fracking have little or no oil and gas production. In contrast, the Broomfield City Council had already decided in August to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the energy company Sovereign, allowing drilling of 21 wells as long as Broomfield’s new, stringent drilling standards are met.
The attempted moratorium in Broomfield failed by a mere 13 votes (the tally as of Wednesday morning was 10,266 to 10,253), reflecting deep division in the community. The margin was less than 0.5 percent of ballots cast, which triggers an automatic recount in statewide races in Colorado. But a spokesman for the Colorado Secretary of State said that because the measure was a municipal referendum, local rules would govern the procedure on how to handle the close results.
Fracking opponents told the local newspaper, the Broomfield Enterprise, that they were outspent 25 to 1 in the bitter campaign over oil and gas development.
Elsewhere in Colorado, voters in Boulder and Fort Collins placed a five-year moratorium on fracking. Voters in Lafayette, a city located between Denver and Boulder, banned the practice outright.
Russell Mendell, statewide director of the environmental advocacy organizationFrack Free Colorado, said the successful campaigns show that voters are concerned about the health, safety, and environmental impacts of drilling close to homes and schools in suburban areas. (See related story: “Health Questions Key to New York Fracking Decision, But Answers Scarce.”)
“This is the point in history where communities need to decide if they want to stay addicted to hydrocarbons and fossil fuels or move toward sustainable energy,” Mendell said, adding that he expects more cities to use the ballot box to ban fracking.
Colorado Petroleum Association president Stan Dempsey said the industry is not surprised by the votes, which he called largely symbolic. Dempsey said there is no proposed oil or gas development in Boulder or Lafayette, and that there is only one small operator in Fort Collins.
“Broomfield is the community that is representative of Colorado,” Dempsey said, referring to the city that voted down a moratorium. Dempsey added that he expects the Fort Collins ban will be fought in court.
Colorado courts, rather than voters, may well decide if municipalities have the authority to ban fracking. In July, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper’s administration joined the Colorado Oil and Gas Association in a lawsuit seekingto overturn a fracking ban passed by voters in Longmont, a city north of Boulder. The lawsuit has not been resolved.
Across the country, more than 100 municipalities have passed fracking bans or temporary moratoriums, according to FracTracker, a nonprofit organization that compiles data on the oil and gas industry. The bans have often put them at odd with state laws. (See related story: “Battles Escalate over Community Efforts to Ban Fracking.”)
It’s a trend that experts expect will continue as advanced drilling techniques, including fracking, allow energy companies to access oil and gas that could not be reached in the past.
But Election Day results show that communities are just as likely to strike down bans as pass them. In Ohio, voters in Bowling Green and Youngstown rejected fracking bans. Oberlin, a college town of 8,300, passed a ban.
Mike Chadsey, a spokesman for the Ohio Oil and Gas Association, said he is pleased with the results, particularly in Youngstown, a depressed former steel town where residents voted down a similar ban in May.
“Hopefully the message was received,” Chadsey said, adding that a coalition of local Democrats, Republicans, and labor unions campaigned against the ban.
Chadsey said there are no current drilling permits in Oberlin or Bowling Green. He called the ballot measures a publicity effort by fracking opponents because the state, not municipalities, has jurisdiction over drilling in Ohio. “They are causing trouble and trying to make a headline,” Chadsey said.
Susie Beiersdorfer, a member of Frackfree Mahoning Valley, which supported the ballot measure in Youngstown, said the loss can be explained by voters who are hard up for the jobs energy development brings.
“The mentality is the next white knight is going to come and save the day,” said Beiersdorfer, who also mounted an unsuccessful campaign for Youngstown City Council president. “I just hope we don’t have a disaster here.”
This story is part of a special series that explores energy issues. For more, visitThe Great Energy Challenge.
For more see: Fracking Causes Democratic Outbreaks Across the US