Murrysville Hearing February 24, 2020
The Murrysville hearing on their gas ordinance was at Westmoreland Court House. John Smith argued for Murrysville. After two hours of legal arguments in front of Judge Smail, there is too much information to share, but I will post a few salient points made by John. . Others please add other points you think important or correct anything if needed.
*There is no supporting rationale for the 750 foot setback. Murrysville Council ignored the 1000 ft setback recommended by the task force. Setbacks should be established to protect health, not to allow for drilling. The purpose of zoning is to protect public health, safety, and welfare. The lesser, 750 setback is arbitrary, without basis.
*Murrsyville ignored compatibility.Drilling took precedent despite the fact that industry can now drill from 4 miles out and does not need the acreage.
*There is no obligation on the part of the Dep to proactively protect citizens from air pollution produced by fracking. DEP will not determine how far the pollution will extend, who will be affected. -That’s not their job.
*If fracking is compatible with uses in the residential zone then why the need for an overlay? The overlay results in some people living in residential areas being more protected that those who live in the overlay (of residential areas) where drilling can occur.
*Zoning is not public policy . It is constitutional.
*Testimony is not needed as to the industrial nature of drilling- the PA Supreme court has established that,
*Municipalities/townships establish constitutional zoning by allowing only compatible uses within their zones.
* Mr. Gessinger was brought in as an expert witness with none of his data made available to John prior to the hearing, thus precluding adequate questioning by john. This is in violation of law.
*The rationale behind the overlay is -to go after the fewest neighbors to provide drilling areas- but those few are not protected.
*The Murrysville Business district provides for commercial and industrial uses but drilling is not allowed there. (Instead drilling was placed in overlayed residential areas. )
*Gas operations are not a similar industrial activity to building a home or laying a sewage line(the examples given by gas, municipality attornies). The gas property will remain industrial.
*Judge Peliigrini had noted that townships cannot make fracking safe by adding conditions at a conditional use hearing.
*The job of the council and ZHB is to follow the law and not be deterred by concerns about threat of lawsuit by gas industry. Follow the law, the PA Constitution John argued—Show me the case law based on municipalities arguing, “we don’t want to be sued”
*Economics should not trump the Constitution
