| Urgent Update on HB 1459 and Other Legislative Actions from Troy Coons, NWLA Chairman
I wanted to update you on recent legislative developments, including our work on several bills that have significant implications for landowners.
Bill 2012 This past week, we focused on Bill 2012, ensuring that Bill 2208—a previous piece of legislation that some legislators were attempting to reinsert—was removed once again. The language in Bill 2208 would have allowed for undue control over local townships and counties, particularly when studying emerging industries or addressing community concerns. Thankfully, this language has been killed for now.
Bill 2014 We also worked on Bill 2014, which addresses the budget for the Industrial Commission and DMR (Department of Mineral Resources). A major success here was securing two additional reclamation specialists for the DMR, bringing the total to three. As more oil and gas sites expand, it is critical to ensure proper reclamation efforts to protect the interests of property owners. We’re optimistic that these additions will stay in the bill as it moves forward.
Bill 1459 Now, onto HB 1459, which has been a massive challenge. Without going into all the historical details (which you can review in previous updates), this bill has sought to change contract law, introduce numerous new definitions for royalty rates, and insert many other provisions we find unacceptable and potentially unconstitutional. The implications of this bill are deeply concerning, as it undermines the rights of private citizens and property owners, in favor of industry expansion without adequate cooperation from the mineral or surface owners. This is a troubling precedent. The state should not set the tone that it is acceptable to take from private citizens for industry advancement, especially when the industry hasn’t made a genuine effort to engage with landowners, as was the case historically with coal. While the Senate passed a more acceptable version of the bill last week (7-0 in committee and 46-0-1 on the floor), the drastic differences between the Senate and House versions required a conference committee. However, the House has now completely reversed the Senate’s version, introducing a new policy statement and redefining critical terms like royalties. This change comes after all public hearings have concluded, which is deeply concerning. I am especially alarmed by the rush to make decisions on this bill, with a select few making these critical decisions in a condensed timeframe, without the broader public fully aware of the developments.
This issue needs to be on everyone’s radar. It is yet another troubling move by our legislature that could have lasting consequences for landowners across the state.
|
