What do you think about Governor Corbett's Marcellus shale plan?

What do you think is good or bad?

Views: 753

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on October 4, 2011 at 2:17pm
It's an excellent plan. But not if you live in Philadelphia or in Pittsburgh or in Allentown.

That's why the plan has zero support from Democrats. I hope it becomes law anyway.
Permalink Reply by Kathleen Elsie Gibbs on October 5, 2011 at 2:31am
So far it looks fair to the communities and the industry. We will see.
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on October 6, 2011 at 6:02am

All in all, it looks good.  I haven't seen a full writeup of the proposal but just media condensations of it so I need todo more research for a full analysis. But there are several good things like the impact fees going to where the impacts are, a portion of the money going to aid for municipalities to convert vehicles to CNG, better setbacks from surface waters, and the expansion of the well protections to 2500'.

 

One thing I wish he had added was better regulations on off gassing from tanks, compressor stations, pipelines, and more. The EPA has a voluntary program for nat gas called the Natgas Star program

http://www.epa.gov/gasstar/

The most effective of these methods could have been made mandatory at a reasonable cost, perhaps even saved them money in the long run.

0l1a6laz7smpfPermalink Reply by 0l1a6laz7smpf on October 7, 2011 at 2:04pm

http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2011/10/04/corbetts-marcell...

 

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/billinfo.cfm?syear=201...

 

I just received an email regarding some statistics involved if this plan goes thru...I will post in a minute what that email stated from another marcellus site on the web.

 

What I want to put into discussion is who will pay for these impact fees if one is already involved in a lease (soon to produce since wells are already dug in the unit)....it involves money....so typically these kind of things can be negotiated in a lease contract up front but since this talk of an impact fee is after the fact (and so many are already involved in leases)...who will pay?   will this be a cost to the landowner before receiving royalties?  what if their contract states they are to receive 'gross' royalty rather than 'net'?    How many believe that the oil company will just pay it without trying to charge the landowner for that also?   Now my contract does state that the gas company will pay in regards to clean and green impact fees/taxes...but what about local impact fees?

 

interested in comments about that....still new to all of this....sounds like Penns. is new to this also...as the impact of gas exploration to the communities and their infra systems didn't seem to be realized til many leases and wells were done.

 

 

__Below is the excerpt of the email sent (mentioned above) from a marcellus user group:

 

The details of Governor Corbett's proposed

plan are still sketchy, but our data team

decided to make a preliminary comparison

between the estimated revenue PA counties

would receive in the first year's

disbursement under the Corbett Plan, and

under the currently proposed Senate Bill

1100 legislation.

Thirty one counties would collect revenue,

and we've listed the top 6 counties in

order of anticipated revenue they'd receive.



Corb. Plan | Bill 1100 | County



$9,390,000 | $7,127,000 | Bradford

$6,630,000 | $5,032,000 | Tioga

$4,050,000 | $3,073,000 | Washington

$2,670,000 | $2,026,000 | Lycoming

$2,340,000 | $1,776,177 | Greene

$1,980,000 | $1,502,000 | Susquehanna



We've created a graph that lists all

31 counties and estimated total revenue

assigned to each county. The graph, along

with associated statistics can be viewed at: 


0l1a6laz7smpfPermalink Reply by 0l1a6laz7smpf on October 7, 2011 at 2:40pm
the above email info came from marcellusgas.org since I couldn't edit this info in the latest post.
Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on October 8, 2011 at 2:32am

The reaction statewide seems to be good so far.  Of course some environmental groups came out against it but that is to be expected.  No way to make them happy.

But the reaction has been good.  Most people seem to agree with almost all of it.  Some Philly area politicos want an extraction tax so they can get their grimey hands on the money but hopefully they will be stymied.

I haven't heard how soon these will be addressed.  I am sure that there will be hearings so that every politico will have his/her turn in front of the tv cameras.  The process is slow but I imagine some form of a bill will be passed by years end.

Permalink Reply by George Brown on October 9, 2011 at 4:33pm

It's just another example of useless politicians, who produce little if anything valuable for society, sticking their crooked little fingers into the cookie jar.  Yes, the plan will do less damage than it would have if Fast Eddie was still in office, but it is damaging nonetheless.

Don't fall for the "impact fee" argument. The politicians talk as if there will be all this damage but no money to pay for it without the passage of an impact fee.  That's a crock!  What about all the taxes being generated by the increased economic activity due to drilling?  If a farmer gets some royalty money and buys a new tractor, 6% of that purchase goes right into Pennsylvania's pocket.  How about a new well is drilled and a bunch of workers come into a small town to do the construction.  Those workers will pay income taxes, they will eat at establishments, possibly stay in local hotels or inns, maybe rent a car, etc., etc. All of this generates tax revenues.

How about local folks getting jobs in the industry?  That's a double bonus for Harrisburg.  Not only will those people require fewer social services now that they have a job, but they will also now be paying their 3.07% state income tax. So rather than being a drain to the state, those folks now are putting money into the state's pockets.

What the elected thieves want is all that tax money to p#$s away on their favored programs and impact fees too!

Permalink Reply by craig on October 10, 2011 at 3:04am

What you say is absolutely true. All sales tax monies and State Income tax monies will be spread across the state. However it is my understanding that the local municipalities won't benefit because in Pa municipal entities don't get the chance to collect income taxes on the lease and or royalty monies because it is not earned income. At least that is what I was told by our local officials. Correct me if I am wrong. That is where the local drilling fees help out the local folks instead of the local income tax.

 

 

Permalink Reply by George Brown on October 10, 2011 at 10:45am
You're correct Craig.  Local taxes cannot be applied here.  But the state is getting richer from this economic activty so why doesn't Harriburg simply block grant the additional revenue back to the counties where the drilling is taking place? That would be my answer instead of creating a whole new set of taxes (i.e. fees).
Permalink Reply by craig on October 10, 2011 at 1:27pm

That would be ideal. However those areas that don't have the gas,etc, or don't want them drilling, will lobby and cry their hearts out for their fair share...of course what is a fair share? Can you say Philadelphia?

Permalink Reply by George Brown on October 10, 2011 at 3:18pm
Unfortunately, you are correct.  But I'll bet Philly and Agony County will end up clawing away more of the impact fee revenue too. Either way, the less populated counties will end up subsidizing the dysfunctional city governments. That's why I don't want to see any additional fees/taxes of any kind because I know at some point the additional revenue will get diverted.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service