Say no to oil and gas, vote ‘Yys’ on Prop. 112
Notice how politicians use teachers and kids in their ads? This year, candidates promise to raise teacher pay but don’t vote for tax increases to do that. Prop 112 opponents claim teachers will lose jobs. What they’re really saying is protect our industry profits. Two percent of school budgets statewide come from oil and gas severance taxes. As a retired teacher, almost every year we were asked to cut our budget requests by at least 2 percent, with minimal impact.
After the gas pipeline explosion in Firestone, the Legislature introduced a bill requiring drilling pads be 1,000 feet from school playgrounds, a commonsense idea for Coloradans. The Republican Senate killed the bill to protect oil and gas profits, not kids and teachers. Opponents of Prop. 112, like Matt Gray, say we should be more flexible and give local governments more power over drilling. But the state sues municipalities that try to protect its citizens. Independent candidate Jay Geyer of Broomfield wants to create setbacks, like Prop. 112, but allow drilling closer if there aren’t local objections. That’s exactly what voting “yes” on Prop. 112 would do.
John Dellinger, (“Ballot fatigue shows big problem,” Denver Post letter to editor, Oct. 22) said Prop 112 signatures were gathered by all volunteers. I was one of them. However, big-money interests from oil and gas companies have spent over $30 million opposing Prop. 112. Think what $30 million could have done toward repairing local relationships instead of fighting with Coloradans. Vote “yes” on Proposition 112.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.