“Yes, comma.” Such was the answer from County Counsel Mike Ghizzoni on Tuesday when asked whether Measure P has — and would continue to, if voters enact the fracking ban on November 4 — put his office in a vise. But, added Ghizzoni — under the spotlight of supervisors and public commenters at the board meeting — the rules that county staff will hammer out in preparation of the initiative’s potential passage could at least minimize the number of lawsuits expected from landowners and oil companies.
In its quest to ban all new fracking, acidizing, and cyclic-steaming operations in the county’s unincorporated areas, the measure has already attracted two legal threats against the county, one from PetroRock LLC and one from ERG Operating Company, both of which run cyclic-steaming wells outside of Santa Maria.
As was suggested in Measure P’s own language, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously in Tuesday’s special meeting to have county planners examine all of the possible legal attacks the measure could foment — vested rights, property takings, and violations of the state and/or federal constitutions — and establish the protocols for dealing with them and protecting itself in the process.

Paul Wellman
LOOKING AT LIABILITY: County Counsel Mike Ghizzoni took questions and comments from the supervisors, oil industry officials, and environmentalists about Measure P’s legal risks.
The recently formed, industry-backed “No on P” crowd turned out in full force and went comment-to-comment with the blue-shirt-wearing and Measure P–spearheading Water Guardians. (A few politicos also attended the show, including former Sheriff’s candidate Sergeant Sandra Brown, now in charge of bailiffs; former congressional hopeful Justin Fareed; and Ron DeBlauw, who is challenging Assemblymember Das Williams — a Measure P spokesperson — for his seat.)
Where one pro-P speaker likened the purported omnipresence of legal threats to the false promises made in Nigerian email scams, Ghizzoni backed up industry representatives’ assertions that lawsuits are likely. “We are certainly planning for some amount of litigation. We don’t have a history on something like this to predict whether that’s 10 cases, 100 cases, or how much litigation we would expect,” Ghizzoni said, adding that the county doesn’t have insurance coverage to handle takings claims.
Ghizzoni — peppered with questions from Supervisors Peter Adam and Steve Lavagnino over the measure’s reaches and those reaches’ effects on the county — said his office was already slammed just in readying for the measure and, if the initiative passes, would likely need two new full-time attorneys to handle Measure P–related claims, not to mention possible lawsuits from environmental groups that could allege that the exemptions go too far.
While the measure’s supporters stuck to their argument that Measure P won’t harm already-permitted projects, oil reps stuck to their counter-argument that it will. Without the county’s protocols in place, Ghizzoni said, existing operations see a “pretty big overlap” with vested rights, which, along with how to treat well-maintenance techniques, could present the biggest pickle. Supervisor Janet Wolf suggested that staff look at including an exemption for maintenance treatments in its protocols; according to Kevin Drude, in charge of the county’s Energy Division, every well “at some point in its lifetime” will require such maintenance, either for minor stimulation or de-gunking.
Rachel Hooper, the lawyer for the San Francisco–based firm that wrote Measure P as well as a similar ballot initiative going before San Benito County voters in November, wrote in a letter to Ghizzoni that the measure’s backers support the county’s efforts to “codify the processes for applying these exemptions” as doing so would make for a “smooth transition period” in the weeks between the initiative’s passage and its implementation. Notable Water Guardians Katie Davis and Rebecca Claassen urged the supervisors, respectively, to not be swayed by the “scare tactics” waged by the oil industry and to remember that Santa Barbara County is “far from alone” in trying to ban such drilling operations.
On the national level, the federal Government Accountability Office on Monday chastised the Environmental Protection Agency for its lax oversight of water- and earthquake-related risks tied to fracking. The controversial practice hasn’t been on Santa Barbara County’s radar since the supervisors put in place tough regulations in 2011. However, according to Drude, more than half of the county’s 1,200 active oil wells use cyclic steaming, and most of the project proposals on his desk want to use cyclic steaming, too.
Comments
It's going to be funny to see the industry's argument entirely fall apart once the county staff write the exemptions ordinance. There will be no grounds for litigation. Unfortunately, since the industry has millions of dollars to spare (while the Pro P folks have pocket change in comparison) they're poisoning the well right now by telling voters that "bankruptcy" and "shut down" are what's to be feared. What I fear is 10,000 new wells being drilled which use obscene amounts of water, would double or triple the county's GHG emissions, and of course the risk of contamination from said operations or their injection wells and pools. The industry has succeeded in shifting the conversation away from the actual risks of these practices to these hollow threats.
nitrogen (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2014 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
agree, nitrogen, and the industry flacks are going all-out to brow-beat and scare voters, not through thoughtful opposition but through scare tactics like these. Good to see the running scared; Measure P will pass easily.
DavyBrown (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2014 at 8:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
10,00 wells? Where'd you get that figure?
Water? Fracking uses non-potable water and recyles it.
Contamination? Fracking is done below the water table and the wells are lined with concrete just like any other well.
Maybe it's not the "industry flacks" that are out to scare the voters.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2014 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
so, you vote, 'will of the people', but then the corporations sue. Not will of the people.
spacey (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2014 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nitro: You seem to weight in first and most for the 'guardians' The Energy Division says "more than half of the county’s 1,200 active oil wells use cyclic steaming, and most of the project proposals want to use cyclic steaming". Steaming has been conducted extensively in the county since the late 1960s.
Shouldnt this place be a smoking ruin by now? Where is all the doom and destruction claimed by the 'guardians' from this longstanding 'extreme' production practice. We arent seeing it.
Same goes for acidizing. Its been employed extensively for decades too. The county should be a burned over war zone . . should it not?
nuffalready (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2014 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The weird thing about thermally enhance oil production (huff and puff steaming, steam drive, or fire flood) is that it takes a lot more Btu's to produce the oil than the final product will ever provide in the form of fuel energy. That is why these production techniques are economically feasible only when the price of oil is high. It seems silly to me to spend more energy to produce an energy product than the final energy product could ever produce. It's sort of like trying live off a food source that takes more calories to eat and digest than it provides in food energy. I understand the economics. What I don't understand is why we should have to put up with silly energy production policy and the attendant pollution just so some Texas oil company can make money.
Eckermann (anonymous profile)
July 31, 2014 at 8:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ekermann: Nobody invests $millions (literally) and years for permitting for steamed wells if there is zero chance of making the money back. The initial capital outlay is huge. Oil production isnt a casual amusement for dabbling Texans (or your SB county neighbors) that maybe want to score a few bucks. Its very risky. One has to know what one is doing.
And nowadays Ekermann, there is a linear relationship between BTUs and dollars.
nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 1, 2014 at 9:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ekermann: Sorry the last post was a little snarky. The local politics can get pretty annoying. Anyway here are the economics.
The Midway Sunset posted price is around $92 per bbl. Thats for 15 API gravity oil. You take a hit of $0.42 per API degree for heavy heavy SB crude that hovers down around 9 API gravity. So lets say we end up with $79 per bbl. If one is good, one can generate steam and tuck in other lifting costs for around $16 per bbl water equivilent. And if one is good it takes about 4 bbl steam for each bbl oil. So steaming costs around $64. That leaves around $15 bbl gross margin. Lets not forget the mineral owners. They get around $5 per bbl. Most of them are older folks that are your neighbors. So now we are down to around $10. Debt service etc bites into that.
Lots of variables in the above. Far more than I really understand. I do know one has to be really good at this to make money at it. There are those individuals. We need them actually until renewables make more real world sense than than they do now.
nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 1, 2014 at 9:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Will all those in favor of Fracking please drink one large glass of fracking's by-product, flammable tap water? Poisoning drinking water is an act of war. If the Chinese or Russians tried to do it, we would kill them and/or imprison them, and rightfully so. If you think the oil companies have your best interests at heart, please google "Exxon Valdes", "B.P. oil spill", "Parts per million" by Joy Horowitz, and "Suppressed Inventions" by Jonathan Eisen. Oil and gas are 19th century technologies. http://www.amazon.com/Suppressed-Inve...
Rinconer (anonymous profile)
August 1, 2014 at 10:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Rinconer: Methane and groundwater occur naturally together. Maybe you could draw a tall glass of flammable tap water in Huntington Beach. No fracking there but methane seeps to the surface. How about just offshore at Coal Oil Point near (gasp) Santa Barbara? Methane boils up pretty vigorously there. No fracking there either. Face it. Methane and water are two naturally occurring substances. They both come from the earth.
There is no shortage of anti-oil, anti-fracking horror 'documentaries'. If you are getting all your info from them, you need to get out more
nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 1, 2014 at 10:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Flammable tap water? where'd you get that whopper?
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2014 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Flammable tap water is a result of dissolved gases (e.g. methane) in the public water supply:
http://www.propublica.org/article/sci...
Google "flammable tap water" to see example photos/videos:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013...
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2014 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Flammable water is what happens when people who don't know what they're doing or don't care, start fracking. It's not the end result of every frack, just the result of bad players. The oil industry is just like any other industry, there are good players and bad.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2014 at 10:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Best way to get methane (harmless to health) out of the water supplies is to drill for more of it. Just like offshore drilling in the Santa Barbara Channel has greatly reduced naturally occuring tar deposits on our beaches. Finding higher concentrations of methane in water supplies closer to gas drilling operations is a no brainer because the higher natural gas concentraitons already present is why drilling is going on in the first place. Drill, baby drill if you are really concerned about naturally occuring methane in your water supplies.
JarvisJarvis (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2014 at 10:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Dinosaur aged industry completely reliant on dinosaur aged remains. You can't make up that kind of irony. "Energy" producers in this country have lived their own gilded age since the Robber Barons of the early 20th century. Its time to move on to 21st century energy solutions and let the dinosaurs die. Sorry guys, growing up is tough.
EllwoodLocal (anonymous profile)
August 7, 2014 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)