Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on March 21, 2014 at 12:11pm

Moldyoak, Legally speaking you are, of course, correct. But as you acknowledge, there are environmental & moral issues along with a sense of betrayal that goes beyond the legalities. 

Would you agree that there is a need for expression of those issues? If so, would you also agree that united we stand a better chance of being heard?

To that end might you also agree that getting together a petition would be of value? The focus would be upon the public exposure of  those practices contrary to being a good neighbor and being able to have your word be your bond.

Dan

Permalink Reply by Moldyoak on March 21, 2014 at 12:40pm

"then why did the state supreme court tell the legislators to define what royalty means exactly at the state level?i thought that is what this hb1684 is supposed to do."

I certainly can't speak for the state Supreme Court, but regardless of whether anything can be constitutionally accomplished to aid *existing* lessors, the law can be modified to apply to future leases going forward.  This would be my interpretation, anyway.

"Would you agree that there is a need for expression of those issues?"

Absolutely, 100%.  However, I do not believe that the legislature is the place to seek redress of suspicion of wrongdoing but rather the AG, and it appears that an investigation is already in its infancy.  Concerning environmental issues, DCNR and DEP would be the proper channels from which to seek assistance, I believe, however it appears that many conspiracy theorists are making the assumption that those state offices are 'owned' by the gascos.  I do not believe this myself, having seen first-hand (albeit simply as an observer) the work that goes into a state DEP investigation.

Permalink Reply by PHILIP ANGELO on March 21, 2014 at 1:09pm

I agree 100%.But ,I also believe the original intent of the GMRA 1979 was to protect the land owners. The next step will be the Attorney General which will definitely find the SMOKING GUN. 

Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on March 21, 2014 at 12:34pm

Darlene,

See if this rough draft of a petition strikes any chord. Modify at will of course.

ROUGH DRAFT

Dear Friend of the Wild Things,

We of the land (farmers,landowners,scientists,conservationists, to name but a few) are dismayed by the carelessness and lack of respect shown by the oil & gas companies for the environment. We would like to rally others to bring pressure upon our legislators, to let them know that we will be heard.

 

When landowners entered into a lease arrangement with oil/gas companies, it was done with the verbal understanding shown by their representatives of the need to maintain careful respect for the environment, the aquifer and air quality. In practice, this has not turned out to be so. Currently there are many suits across the country detailing the abuses and contract violations that have ensued. The leader in this abridgement of agreements has been Chesapeake Oil (CHK).(Google CHK suits for specifics)

 

Oil companies have deep pockets, and can mount a formidable fight to sway lawmakers and the law to their way of thinking. Will you join us in demanding that the spirit of agreements made needs to be held dear. One who may be clever in legalistics ought not to be able to void contracts, verbal or written. In short-one needs to be held to one’s word of honor.

 

This is a request for those with a small voice to become a mighty one, and to require the return to an earlier time when your word was your bond. This is a moral argument of course, but one sadly needing to be emphasized in our current time. May we count you in?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by alexandra on March 21, 2014 at 1:57pm

I don't know about you, but I am not looking to sign any environmental impact statement!!  I want my fair share of the royalties PERIOD as I was promised by the oil & gas companies.  Take that other crap out!!!!

Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on March 21, 2014 at 2:17pm

You write very well is it OK if I work with it also ? If that is OK and I will re-post it and PLEASE PEOPLE this is for US and WE NEED TO FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHTS!

I kind of agree with Alexandria although I want what we agreed upon and I want the water and our land protected first and fro most and if they cannot pay up get out of our County!  But I want them out period and we can hire someone else to run our WELLS , US!!!

Permalink Reply by Moldyoak on March 21, 2014 at 2:18pm

Philip - to play devil's advocate, what makes you think there is a "smoking gun" to be found?  An explanation for the high deductions, yes, that would be expected and I believe a clear explanation is owed any lessor.  But the term 'smoking gun' is indicative of a suspicion of fraud.  Currently, as I would interpret the 1979 law and any other relative state law, there is no legal limit to what CHK can deduct if it falls under the auspices of their own market enhancement clause which of course many people signed.  I suspect strongly that the extreme high cost of CHK deduction is partly because CHK lessors are bearing the full cost of pipeline construction; whether this is morally wrong or not is certainly a hot topic, but nevertheless, it is very likely legal under the terms of CHK boilerplates.  Those signing such leases have given CHK the right to deduct for 'gathering' and 'transporation,' and the cost of constructing a pipeline can certainly be interpreted as being categorized under either/both of those subsets of deductions.

I sincerely hope that those who are subject to such deductions are given some relief, in some way, and are able to recoup what has been taken from them.  However, all the hope in the world will not render something to be so if it fails to meet the determination of illegality.

Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on March 21, 2014 at 3:18pm

Alexandra & Darlene,

As pointed out previously, legislative action will be needed to get the relief desired. This approach is to give us some leverage to apply to the legislators. For that we need to have a groundswell of folks showing their discontent.

Moldyoak,

There are fraud allegations being pursued currently, following the call by Gov. Corbett & Senator Yaw for the Attorney General to look over CHK actions.

We need to send our own message, from the little guy, with the implication that we wield a mighty weapon-our vote.

Best,

Dan

Permalink Reply by Moldyoak on March 21, 2014 at 3:35pm

Yes, the AG investigation is what I was referencing.  However, don't hold your breath, because as I interpret current law, CHK and others have - literally - free reign to deduct virtually anything they choose.

Votes?  Don't mean much at all - the proportion of voters in Bradco, Susq. Co and maybe Wyoming Co. comparative to the sheer numbers of voters in the state who couldn't give a damn and frankly who think we as landowners are undeserving of royalty or are otherwise greedy, is in a practical sense insignificant.  Our regional representatives may have to pander to us, but the remainder of the (very large) state is oblivious and in all likelihood jealous with a vindictive. capricious bent.

Sad, but very true whether any of us want to look truth in the face or not.

Permalink Reply by daniel cohen on March 21, 2014 at 3:41pm

Moldyoak-we are in agreement.What would you propose we do to voice our concerns?

Dan

Permalink Reply by PHILIP ANGELO on March 21, 2014 at 4:21pm

Daniel, I agree and disagree let me elaborate

1) fraud and collusion: chk sold their pipelines for 5 Billion dollars leveraging the landowners gas to secure the buyers investment. I'm sure there had to be some back room deal and a paper trail that will prove that.

2) fair market pricing everyone knows that chk sell our gas to companies that they own for less then fair market price just to resell at much high price.

3) Reported Volumes I would allege these numbers are not correct and a more comprehensive investigation will show this.

Now with that said, I don't think this has anything to do with HB 1684 but that will be the next step

Permalink Reply by Darlene Newton on March 21, 2014 at 5:11pm

Dan and Alexandra this is what I have put together as a petition tell me what you think needs changing if not we are set to go  Please we are all fighting for the same cause so this is a GROUP effort!  We will NOT win if we do not work together!  Any thing can be changed just tell me what so check it out and if we like it lets start sending it

Subject: PAY UP OR GET OUT

Hi,

I created a petition to The Pennsylvania State House, The Pennsylvania State Senate, and Governor Tom Corbett which says:

" Pennsylvania’s Guaranteed Minimum Royalty Act (GMRA)The court made clear that a lessee cannot try to circumvent the mandates of the GMRA, which requires that the lessor receive at least a one-eighth royalty on all production.
"

Thanks!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• 13
• …
• 20
• Next ›
• Page