September 16, 2014

Future oil well regulations could be a possibility

Danedri Thompson
dthompson@gardnernews.com
City officials aren’t particularly interested in allowing oil wells within city limits. That’s the consensus council members appeared to reach during a work session on Aug. 4.
Community Development Director Mike Hall shared information about oil drilling and wells with the council. The work session came on the heels of a planning commission decision to recommend rejection of a conditional use permit for oil wells on property adjacent to Celebration Park. Council members have not yet considered that specific matter, but they discussed the potential negatives of allowing oil wells within city limits.
“Successful oil wells inside and outside the city are a major obstacle to planned residential growth,” Hall explained.
When oil wells are successful, they make a lot of money and property owners are reluctant to sell land with producing wells for development purposes.
“Development for other purposes has to compete with that land use,” Hall said.
Currently, there are several oil wells located within the city’s planned growth area. Hall specifically listed wells in operation near Celebration Park and near the Kill Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. With a simple electrical permit, the county allows oil wells on parcels larger than 10 acres.  Hall said the county typically does not formally notify the city when someone seeks to put oil wells on property just beyond Gardner’s city limits. Hall suggested city staff may want to ask the county to require a more inclusive permitting process for wells in unincorporated areas.
There is also no telling how long an oil well might be productive. A well could produce oil for 10 years, 20 years or even longer, Hall explained.
“After the well has been mined and the economic life of the well has ended, then the well is typically abandoned,” Hall said.
There are challenges to future development on land that used to house oil-producing wells.
The Kansas Corporation Commission has some oversight in the capping of old wells, however, once well plugs are installed, the wells are not monitored.
“The KCC, they’re oversight is not to address the safety of the well,” Hall explained. “Their emphasis is really for the efficient use of the resource to avoid conflicts between well operators.”
Abandoned wells can have leaks due to inadequate plumbing, and there could be gas accumulation, which could lead to explosions.
“There haven’t been a lot of occurrences of this,” Hall explained. “There can be ground or water contamination as well.”
Oil wells are not expressly permitted in any zones other than agricultural zoning, Hall said.
“But I think you could say oil wells, given their life, which is at least 10 years, more like 20 years — they could be a hindrance to a higher use,” he explained. “There should be a question of whether they should be allowed in the city.”
Hall wasn’t sure whether a city could outright ban oil wells.
“I’m not sure that legal question has been answered yet, but that’s something to be considered,” he said.
Council members requested more information about how other municipalities deal with oil wells. However, they appeared to reach a consensus to ban oil wells if possible.
“At the end of the day, what benefit is it to the city?” council member Heath Freeman asked. “Is it going to provide tax benefits to the city? Is it going to hinder future development? I think that’s the greater policy question. Is it a mutually beneficial situation for all involved?”
Gardner is more landlocked than many cities due to encroaching annexations of Olathe and Edgerton.
“Once a drill is tapped, if it’s pumping oil, we’re not going to buy them out of it,” Freeman said.

Comments

  1. Judith Rogers says:

    I certainly do not believe it would be advantageous for the citizens to have gas and/or oil wells within the city limits of Gardner. I certainly appreciated the Gardner Planning Commission at their last meeting in denying a request by the Russell Family LLC for a conditional use permit for wells of that nature and I would think those families living in that area would certainly be grateful that the request was denied. I also would not want the city to take on the liability of providing those permits because once again, I believe all citizens would be placed at risk in numerous ways if that occurred. And on top of that the Russell Family LLC the last I checked was delinquent in paying their assessments as shown below:

    CF221410-2001 – 2013 $70,250.44

    CF221410-1001 – 2012 $16,449.65
    2013 $35,425.39

    CF221409-3003 – 2012 $5,827.16
    2013 $12,549.23

    CF221409-3001 – 2012 $43,693.23
    2013 $94,096.76

    CF221409-3002 – 2013 $34,346.73

    Total $312,638.79

    And keep in mind the Russell Family LLC has sued the city of Gardner and its citizens before. To me the wheeling and dealing with the Russell Family LLC since 2004 has been a nightmare for the citizens and continues to be one. And I certainly hope ALL CITIZENS know how they got into the Russell Family LLC mess and learn a valuable lesson. I hope all citizens look at the tax bills on these properties and note the comparison of what they pay in taxes to the city of Gardner and its citizens (that is if they actually paid their taxes and assessments) compared to their assessment amounts – the good ole “farm” appraisal classification once again.

    I would advise citizens to keep a close eye on this issue – it has the potential to be a real ass-burner in my opinion.

Comments do not necessarily reflect those of The Gardner News, or staff. By posting, commentators assume all liability. Please contact webmaster to report comments that infringe on copyrights, or are of a profane or libelous nature. Webmaster reserves the right to edit or remove content deemed offensive.


 

Speak Your Mind