San Benito County supervisors were forced to delay approval of an updated oil and gas well ordinance Tuesday due to a public notice requirement.
Barbara Thompson, of the county counsel’s office, said the staff members had failed to incorporate one of the amendments proposed by Supervisor Margie Barrios during the May 7 discussion of the oil and gas ordinance. Barrios had requested an amendment that would require approval of the supervisors to waive or defer fees for a conditional use permit related to oil and gas wells.
Due to the additional amendment, county counsel staff members could not publish a summary of the ordinance twice at least five days before the Tuesday meeting, as required by law. Thompson said due to publication limitations – with the Free Lance publishing once a week on Friday – the earliest date for the second publication would be May 31, which would not allow five days of public notice before the June 4 meeting. Thompson said the day of publication does not count as one of the five days for public notice.
“It would change the effective date by 18 days,” Thompson said, noting that the supervisors could approve the ordinance on June 18, with it going into effect 30 days later on July 18. “Then we could include the fee waiver.”
Supervisor Anthony Botelho allowed public comment at the meeting even though there was no vote taken on the ordinance.
“I’m here to represent Aromas CARES,” said Wayne Norton, an Aromas resident. “This is a strong ordinance that was a collaborative effort. … I’m disappointed it can’t (be approved) today because a lot of us took time off, vacation days.”
Norton said Aromas CARES supported the ordinance even with the amendments from the last meeting, which changed the bond requirement to $15,000 per six facilities or up to 36 wells from the same dollar amount for one well.
Supervisor Jerry Muenzer proposed changing language in the ordinance that would refer to “wells” as “facilities,” with one facility referring to up to six wells. He then suggested the bond be approved at $15,000 for up to six facilities per user permit, with a cap of $100,000.
Muenzer said that at an April meeting, a representative of the state’s department of conservation noted that the state takes responsibility for wells from “birth to death.”
“We are asking for a $15,000 bond per well or $100,000 for seven or more,” Muenzer said. “I feel this is redundant.”
Supervisor Anthony Botelho, on the other hand, said he did not think the bond level was set high enough to cover a potential clean-up if anything were to go wrong with an oil or gas well in the county.
“There is some rationale to what we are asking for,” he said, adding later in the meeting that if a company cannot afford a $15,000 bond, it should not be in business.
The supervisors are expected to take a vote on approving the ordinance June 18.
