Colorado Alliance of Mineral and Royalty Owners' represents the interests of over 600,000 mineral owners across the state of Colorado. The organization encourages and promotes exploration and production of minerals throughout the state. CAMRO works to preserve, protect, and advance the interests and rights of mineral and royalty owners through education, advocacy and assistance to its members.
Colorado Schools Face Extreme Financial Hardship if Initiative 97 Curtails Mineral Development
7/11/18 Press Release
Under a recent Colorado Open Records Act request, the Colorado Alliance of Mineral and Royalty Owners, or CAMRO, found that, since 1980, the Colorado Land Board’s education funds received over $560 million in revenue from oil and gas leases in Colorado’s Wattenberg Field. In the last two years alone, these assets generated $166 million in revenue and interest, which funded K-12 public schools as well as Colorado’s higher education institutions. Although legacy drilling can continue under Initiative 97, the State Land Board wouldn’t reap any of the benefits of future innovations in oil and gas production because no new drilling would be permitted.
Read the full press release here!
Opinion Column in the Denver Post by President Neil Ray
"If passed, local control measures and upcoming ballot initiatives like Initiative 97 would put a stranglehold on mineral development here in Colorado. That not only poses a threat to our economy — a 2017 Pricewaterhouse Coopers report found that the natural gas and oil industry in Colorado had an economic impact of $31.4 billion dollars in 2015 — it deprives mineral owners of their property rights. Even worse, governmental entities that ban oil and gas development, or engage in a de facto ban on oil and gas development like Boulder, could bankrupt their city, county or state. Mineral rights are the same as property rights and these entities could be on the hook for up to $26 billion in royalty compensation to mineral and royalty owners."
Colorado Association of Mineral and Royalty Owners Study Shows Colorado Could Be on the Hook for $26 Billion if Bans on Energy Development Pass
“If the seizure of private property rights in Colorado is codified through the local control initiatives or statewide ballot measures, all property rights throughout the state are under attack. Not only do these estimates represent a staggering value that could be taken without compensation from mineral owners by proposed ballot initiatives, but they represent funds taken from tax coffers that fund schools, roads, and other community services that we all value,” said Neil Ray, president of CAMRO.
View the entire press release here: Netherland Sewell Press Release Final.pdf
**Study conducted by Netherland, Sewell and Associates.
VISIT THE NEWSROOM FOR ALL ARTICLES RELATED TO THE PRESS RELEASE!
Commission Changes to Public Comment Process – Jan 22, 2018
View an overview of the changes here.
Martinez v. The COGCC
"Upon consideration of the Motion for Leave to file Brief of Amicus Curiae Vital for Colorado in Support of Petitioners, the Motion of the Colorado Alliance of Mineral and Royalty Owners for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of the Petitioners Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Colorado Petroleum Association, and American Petroleum Institute.....
IT IS ORDERED that said Amicus Brief[s] tendered April 2, 2018 shall be, and the same hereby are, ACCEPTED FOR FILING. BY THE COURT, APRIL 11, 2018"
The defeat of the Martinez lawsuit is vitally important to mineral owners having their mineral developed. I want to thank those of you who have donated to get this document prepared. But there is more work to be done so we are asking everyone who can to donate to the effort. You can donate by clicking here.
From Cindy Bargell, Attorney acting on behalf of CAMRO:
"...It will be a number of months before things go forward as the Respondents now will have the opportunity to file a response, and then oral argument will be set. Only after that occurs will an opinion be rendered. It still could be a year or more before a final ruling, although for now CAMRO’s work, on this case at least, is done as amicus typically do not file response briefs (only by leave of the Court). That said, this is the first time CAMRO has weighed in on a Supreme Court case, and I have appreciated the opportunity to work with you all to make this happen.
I also believe CAMRO raised points relevant to the statutory interpretation not before considered, as well as entered into the record an argument related to potential regulatory takings."