When you can’t win on the law, argue the facts. When you can’t win on the facts, argue the law. When you can’t win on either, become a PR frack flak ! It’s the new career path for lawyers like Frackoski that can’t win zoning lawsuits . . .
MAY 9, 2012 |Fracking Industry Now Largest Employer Of Recent PR GraduatesSAN FRANCISCO—A new labor market study published Wednesday has found that oil companies with hydraulic fracturing interests have outpaced the tobacco industry, Wall Street, and the gun lobby to become the largest employer of recent college graduates with public relations degrees. “These days, media-savvy professionals who know how to publicize questionable scientific data in order to downplay the environmental dangers of forcing toxic fluids into the ground can pretty much write their own ticket,” said Bart Hobijn of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, adding that this year at least 2,500 graduating seniors will be put to work obfuscating the levels of carcinogens in groundwater. “And in the long term, the job demand will only increase. Fracking has become a high-growth sector in which there is an extraordinary amount of spinning to be done.” When asked how he enjoyed his new position with a Pittsburgh-based fracking operator, recently hired PR manager Matt Coleman said he believed the practice is a “safe, clean way to increase our natural gas reserves and reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.”
Scott Kurkowski evidently turned frack flak after losing Dryden and Middlefield :
“Clean Growth Now” ? Where do they get these fracking names ? What about “Truth, Justice and the American Way” ? Or “Paid for by Aubrey McClendon”. “Clean Growth Now” seems to be a lobbying arm of “Capital Advocates”. Couple of the principles are William Teator and Catherine (Willis) Whiteman
There are a couple of problems with their free fracking advice :
1. The courts don’t buy the legal arguments. No “right” to drill everywhere
2. Why pass a resolution to not have a ban if you think a ban won’t work ?
3. The economic upside is a mirage in almost all of CNY
4. Gas wells don’t pollute = cigarettes don’t kill
Quickly . . .
Zoning applies to gas wells in every state. (The Pa. law is being challenged). Despite the revisionist interpretation of Kurkoski’s PR, it applies in NYS. As both the Dryden and Middlefield courts ruled. After hearing the same arguments from Scott Kurkoski at trial . A fact that Kurkoski glosses over in his free advice to towns:
When he urges them to pass resolutions to not ban drilling, when he says bans don’t work. He mumbles about regulatory takings. What does he know about that ? There has never been a regulatory taking regarding gas well zoning . (I know a thing or two about takings claims against towns )
There is no “taking” because the leases were rank speculations.At worst, there might have been a theoretical diminution in value . There was not even that – Gastem abandoned Otsego Co. after 3 dry holes . Anschutz was just prospecting in Dryden. But fracking shills keep threatening them in New York. They threatened one in Dryden – didn’t happen – no grounds for it. They threatened one in Middlefield – nope, won’t happen, no case. Because it’s simply a lobbying stunt, not a plausible takings claim.
Like most of what you get from these fracking lawyers/ lobbyists . . .
The stick – legal threats – to go with the carrot – economic promises. What fracking jobs ? Fracking where ? Fracking when ?
Regulated by the DEC per the proposed regs. ?
They must be fracking joking . . .
According to science ? Really ? How about this science:
“Gas wells don’t pollute = cigarettes don’t kill:
Their audience are town supers that are inclined to punt to the DEC. Not an inspired idea. Adopt a road use ordinance. Adopt a land use ordinance. Or get a new town super.
One Scott Kurkoski argues that land use ordinances magically do not apply to gas wells. The other Scott Kurkoski advises town to pass “frack us” resolutions – before state regs. are issued. Take your pick: