Special Meeting of the Erie Town Council – Mineral Rights Sale (June 16, 2026)

On June 16, 2026, at 1:30 PM MT, the Erie Town Council held a special meeting and public hearing to consider Ordinance 2026-394, which would authorize the sale of the town’s mineral rights to 7N LLC, accept a conveyance of real property from 7N LLC, and approve related agreements with SM Energy Company and Extraction Oil and Gas. The meeting lasted approximately three hours and featured extensive public testimony, council debate, and ultimately a vote on the ordinance. The measure failed 3-4.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Steve Drew & Maria Drew (Erie residents) – Drew strongly opposed the sale, accusing a majority of council of withholding information, bypassing competitive bidding, and failing to represent residents. He noted that the Colorado Attorney General’s Office is investigating the process and urged the council to delay the vote.
• Elizabeth Fisher (Erie resident) – Urged council to retain mineral rights as a long-term asset and questioned the 20-year production timeline, citing declining trends.
• Daniel Rassler (Erie resident) – Argued that council’s previous opposition to the Draco project is inconsistent with selling mineral rights that enable fracking. Said the fossil fuel industry bears a “stain of immorality.”
• Mary Ann Bolkovatz (Erie resident, nurse) – Expressed concerns about public health and environmental damage from fracking, noting the long-term costs of industrial pollution from her experience with a Superfund site.
• Emily Brecht & Janet Brown (Erie residents) – Requested three actions: delay the vote (citing a potential state investigation into the deal’s legality), conduct a full competitive bidding process, and end use of executive session to keep information from citizens. Brown read a statement opposed to the sale.
• Siobhan Blades (Erie resident since 1992) – Criticized the lack of transparency, apparent backroom dealings, and the use of executive sessions. She noted that more than 120 residents signed a letter requesting the Attorney General’s review.
• Carol Campbell (Erie resident, former EPA senior executive) – Cited 35 years of experience with Superfund and oil and gas extraction. She listed process failures: no option analysis, sole-source contracting without RFP, potential conflict of interest between Alameda Minerals and Civitas/SM Energy, and a lack of trust. She said the process was “one of the worst I have ever seen.”
• Don Colasino (Erie resident, 20-year resident) – Argued the council failed its fiduciary responsibility, violated purchasing policies, and instructed the consultant to bypass competitive bidding. He cited Colorado law on executive session requirements and urged a delay.
• Anna Clark (Erie resident, District 2) – Requested a postponement because Councilmember Hoback could not attend, emphasizing the need for all council members to vote on such an important matter.
• Ben Hempel (Erie resident, former Home Rule Charter commissioner) – Stated that the town charter requires voter approval before selling open space, argued that mineral rights under open space are covered, and said the ordinance before council accepts legal exposure. He urged a “no” vote.
• Richard Kohler (Erie resident, professional hydrologist) – Emphasized long-term water quality risks from fracking, noting that once an aquifer is polluted it is extremely expensive to restore. He urged a longer horizon for decision-making.
• John McAllister (Erie resident) – Supported previous speakers and said residents strongly opposed the Draco project, and urged council to delay or vote no.
• Michael Irwin (Erie resident, 38-year oil and gas production engineer) – Provided technical context, noting that 94% of U.S. wells are horizontal and that the DJ Basin is the fourth largest in the country. He said oil and gas is here to stay and Erie was built on resource extraction.
• Rhonda Grassi (Erie resident, 28 years) – Spoke in favor of the deal, arguing that fracking is inevitable and that the town’s best option is to negotiate. She praised the MOU process from 15 years ago as a model for cooperation and said the deal provides benefits like cleaning up old wells and acquiring land.
• Stephen Klein (Erie resident since 2011) – Criticized the “gang of four” for secrecy and potential conflicts of interest. He expressed fear of property value decline and increased cancer risk from fracking, and asked why the sale cannot be put to a referendum.
• Jeremy Zax (Erie resident, 2 years) – Said he would move out of Erie if the deal goes through, and that young families will stop considering Erie. He argued that selling mineral rights to compel cleanup of old wells rewards past damage instead of preventing future harm.
• Christian van Lutenberg (Erie resident) – Read a statement from Councilmember Dan Hoback (who was absent). Hoback’s statement outlined concerns: lack of transparency, overuse of executive sessions, failure to follow competitive bidding, potential legal challenges, and that residents are “broadly and strongly opposed” to the sale.
• Don Johnson (Erie resident, family owned rights since 1912) – Opposed the sale, stating his family’s experience shows selling mineral rights is always a mistake.
• Neha Pizaramelli (Erie resident, Rex Ranch, first-time voter) – Urged council to fulfill their duty to represent constituents, not rush the decision, and to consider long-term impacts on health and future generations.
• Erica Cutlip (Erie resident, 20 years, mother of cancer survivor) – Expressed concern about health risks, lack of transparency, and the rushed process. She questioned why there was no open bidding.
• Laurel (non-resident, works in Erie, former social worker) – Emphasized that rushed processes have deadly consequences for children and vulnerable populations. She highlighted disproportionate health impacts and asked “how many small coffins is it worth buying by rushing this process?”
• Shannon (Thornton resident) – Noted that 20% of Erie’s population are people of color who face communication barriers, and that the absent council member means not all voices are represented. She urged a delay to ensure inclusivity.

Discussion Items

Councilmembers took turns making extended statements. Mayor Pro Tem Bell defended the process, stating that no executive session had been held on this topic since February, that attorney-client privilege was necessary to protect negotiating positions, and that the town had a limited timetable because SM Energy must proceed with the Draco pad. He argued that Draco will happen regardless, and that rejecting the deal would yield nothing. He said the town has been working on the deal for approximately a year. He acknowledged that the purchasing policy for the sole-source contract with Alameda Minerals was not followed (no RFP), calling it an “honest mistake” that would be addressed via internal audit. He noted that the value of the deal had increased from an initial $2.8 million offer to a package worth approximately $43.575 million in land, cash, and additional benefits, including the plugging of 17 additional wells within five years and monthly/quarterly inspections. He stated that the three opposing councilmembers “chose obstruction” and that they put the town at risk by harming the reputation of consultant Matt Owens. He concluded by stating his support for the deal.

Councilmember O’Connor stated that he had gone back and forth on the issue but remained hesitant because he felt the public was still not adequately informed. He noted that only two formations are included in the sale, not all mineral rights, and that the town retains leverage on lower formations. He said he was not ready to move forward without more public outreach, despite the risk of losing the deal.

Councilmember Passamarelli articulated his opposition on three grounds: severe deficiencies in procurement (no competitive bidding, lack of fiduciary safeguards); lack of transparency (rushed vote, overuse of executive session); and the need to prioritize long-term benefits over short-term gain. He said an asset is an asset and should not be sold, especially when the town recently balanced a $393 million budget. He asserted that if SM Energy is a good company, they would clean up wells without the deal. He stated his vote is “no.”

Councilmember Bear read a lengthy statement opposing the deal, arguing that supporting the sale abandons community values and is “a spit in the face” to residents who have spoken out. She cited the letter sent to the Attorney General, the history of extractive industry on indigenous lands and in Erie, and ongoing health and safety concerns. She noted that the town’s mineral rights represent only 8% of the spacing unit, and that the deal would hamstring the town’s authority during the most impactful phases of development (drilling, fracking, flowback) because of a termination clause (Section 41A) that allows 7N LLC to walk away “any time prior to the commencement of production.” She argued that the ordinance’s claim that it is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare is “disingenuous.” She said she will be an “ardent no.”

Councilmember Mortalero spoke in favor, emphasizing that the Draco project is already permitted (approved by the ECMC in March 2025) and will proceed regardless. He said the town’s only influence is on well spacing, which could force laterals to be longer, possibly increasing risk. He highlighted health and safety benefits: 17 old wells with no leak detection will be plugged within five years (adding to 22 from the state deal, total 39), and monthly/quarterly inspections of the well pad. He noted that a well near his own home leaked and is still being mitigated. He argued that the compensation (land, cash, and potential future value) is significant – more than twice Erie’s annual sales tax revenue. He said rejecting the deal would mean “cut off your nose to spite your face.” He stated his support.

Mayor Moore made concluding remarks, emphasizing his fiduciary duty to act in Erie’s best interest even when it is difficult. He stated that Draco will happen regardless, and if the vote fails, Erie gets nothing. He defended the use of executive session, noting that all council members have the ability to object during those sessions, and none did at the time. He argued that Alameda Minerals was uniquely qualified because its owner (Matt Owens) had intimate knowledge of Civitas’s internal economics and was able to leverage a tenfold increase from the initial offer. He acknowledged the purchasing policy lapse but said it is being audited. He stated that the lack of a competitive bid was justified because only SM Energy owned the desired land. He argued that the economic benefits (land for public works, up to $200 million in future value) are critical for the town’s growth. He said he would vote yes.

Key Outcomes

• Vote on Ordinance 2026-394 (authorizing the sale of mineral rights, acceptance of real property, and approval of related agreements): Motion to approve by Mayor Moore; seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Bell. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bear: No. Mayor Pro Tem Bell: Yes. Councilmember O’Connor: No. Councilmember Passamarelli: No. Councilmember Hoback: Absent (not voting). Councilmember Mortalero: Yes. Mayor Moore: Yes. The ordinance failed on a 3–4 vote (3 in favor, 4 opposed/absent).
• Result: The motion to approve the mineral rights sale and related agreements was defeated. The meeting was adjourned immediately after the vote.