As Election Day nears, Peters Township officials are pleading voters to oppose the anti-drilling referendum, filed by the Marcellus Shale Awareness & Action group, placed on the Nov. 8 ballot.
Earlier this month, of placing the amendment on the ballot following the to let voters decide whether to amend the township's home rule charter to ban gas drilling.
A lawsuit by Peters Township officials failed to stop the referendum.
The two-page letter, released and mailed to Peters residents Monday—begging voters to oppose the drill ban—is signed unanimously by Peters Township Council.
It states:
"A Home Rule Charter Referendum on the ballot Nov. 8 will have numerous serious effects on the future of our community if approved.
"On the surface, it leads voters to believe that it's solely a ban on Marcellus Shale drilling in our community; however, if you read the "fine print," it's much more than that. It changes landowner rights, opens the Township to numerous lawsuits, and puts the future of our community in financial jeopardy."
It continues:
"And, what's even more detrimental is that this referendum violates residents' federally protected constitutional rights. It also proposes that the Township is not subject to both the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions.
"If passed, this amendment raises serious concerns over the validity of our Home Rule Charter and the financial future of our community.
"We have an outstanding community and want to maintain its natural environment for future generations. And, because of that, Peters Township Council has enacted zoning ordinances to protect residents while strictly regulating Gas Drilling."
At Monday night's council meeting, members set a budget workshop for Nov. 7 to begin planning the 2012 budget.
Tuesday, Peters Township Manager Michael Silvestri said council will consider adding a 2-mill tax increase to cover legal expenses if the is approved in the Nov. 8 election.
Silvestri said the two-mil increase will not be added if the amendment is defeated.
To read the letter in its entirety, and the ordinance, see the attached documents.
Please vote no to the referendum. .
You know if the law is changed, its not illegal anymore. I think thats whats going on here. People are attempting to change the LAWS.
Fear tactics and mis-truths are all they have going for them. Have you gotten the halloween fear fracking calls yet....? Someone is paying al awful lot of money for canvasing calls to all of PT residents. They are very enjoyable, and its sort of a choose your own fear-adventure. If you are concerned about jobs, you get one line about how a ban gas drilling would be a terrible thing for us as a community... there are a couple other choices. When they call tell them you are concerned about all of the issues equally so you can hear all the horror stories. Seems very reminiscent of political campaigning. They must be very scared of this setting a precedent for other communities to protect themselves. I will be voting YES. Also Judy, you may want to take a look at these articles regarding property values and gas drilling. I believe it is you who are ill informed on the issue there. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/20/us/rush-to-drill-for-gas-creates-mortgage-conflicts.html http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20111021/NEWS01/110210382/Tompkins-governments-Hinchey-draw-attention-drilling-s-impact-mortgages?odyssey=nav%7Chead http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brendan-demelle/gas-industry-front-group-_b_1026047.html There are many more... but these should get you started
And not sure if anyone ever told you this but your house is not worth what you think it is, or what you paid for it, or even what you put into it, it is worth what someone will pay you for it.
I do read my links... I didnt just scan the internet and offer unread links. Yes some mortgage companies are having some issues. In a time when getting a mortgage can be challenging even for people with a good credit rating would you really suggest that taking away SOME players is a good idea? I would suggest that is it NOT a good idea, and these players we are talking about are not your little community banks, they are some of the largest mortgage makers and holders IN THE COUNTRY. Also you are using statistical data for the whole state and ignoring specific areas of PA where drilling is occurring to make the statement that PA property values are increasing on a whole. AND you provide no statistical data and sourced for your argument.
I believe the current ordnance will do little to protect us and ultimately be overturned in court anyhow, so i think this is our only other option. You asked how i feel, that is how i feel. I think PT is already ground zero, why else would some entity be on a calling canvas to all PT residents instilling fear in them.
Too many take their personal opinions on law, as facts. Neither side is 100% sure of outcome in a court of law. I think the “YES” voters feel there will be legal action anyways, so why not use the lawyer’s time fighting to ban the drilling, instead of dishing it out for council’s terms? While the “NO” voters feel council should protect their rights to sell their gas rights & profit, and don’t mind us footing the bill in court to have it on council’s terms, which may b overturned. Either way the tax payers are paying the bill with high risk. Right? I need more info on the “ramifications” of voting YES. I saw claims by council, but are they FACTS? Or, just their own predictions? I see one group working for the good for entire community (dedicating themselves with no actual gain), while the other is driven by personal gain. Fear is a factor on both sides & will come all too clear when drilling starts. Even leasors can share in fear if they want: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-reinbach/stop-gas-drilling-sue-you_b_787881.html Anything is possible, I guess!
You didnt have to remove your post, (i got the scarcasm, but i think its true as well as i read his statement the same way you did. I also agree how people seem to see their VIEW or OPINION as the FACT, while indeed it may not be. There are very few FACTS in this whole discussion that i have seen here. When i make a statement about one of my reasons i try to at least back it up with news stories or links to existing research.
PTMSA- ban: They represent PT residents who are completely against drilling PTMSA-ordinance: They represent those against drilling too but include some consideration towards the taxpayers. PT Council - They are aligned with PTMSA - ordinance Lease holders are completely out in the cold. Those who support the gas industry are completely out in the cold. Who is gaining anything? Fear is driving the three groups but not the lease holders or the supporters.
PTMSA - hijacked by a few all ban folks; dedicated to ban disenfranchised, former PTMSA - hired Leslie Peters, pro ordinance, against ban Council - against ban My husband and I have shouldered most of Ms. Peters expenses, and are incurring more because of the meeting we are hosting at Rolling Hills Country Club on Wed. Nov. 2 from 7-8pm. The meeting is about NOT approving the amendment, the specific legal reasons to vote NO, the ramifications to PT if it is approved, and the case law which supports our current ordinance. Hope to see you there.
Site specific relief is only an option for when a zoned ordinance is overturned. Blaine didn’t have a zoned ordinance and so site-specific relief wasn’t awarded. Only the existing Mineral Extraction Ordinance (zoned ordinance) that both you and council back, could, and is likely to be subject to site-specific relief under the legal challenges that both Chesapeake Energy and Range Resource have already threatened. You've been spouting that same wrap for months. Did you ever mention it to Ms. Peters before? Maybe she can set you straight. It is your dime, right?
It seems like you have wilfully chosen to ignore all information or advice which threatens support of your ban amendment. I can easily find out what the awards have been in these legal cases, and so can you. However, the important operative words in all of them are "lost" "overturned" "rescinded".