No-surface drilling under Betts Park will proceed — but the City Council isn’t unanimously behind it.

The stage for this week’s City Council discussion was set during a special council meeting in February when the council approved an agreement to settle a lawsuit by John Branch, who owns a portion of property that had been incorrectly designated as industrial since 1982. Branch proceeded with a drilling project, according to the incorrect zoning map, and sued when the error was discovered and Branch was told drilling wouldn’t be allowed. Branch and the city reached a consent order saying the two-tenths of an acre that had been incorrectly zoned would be allowed for industrial use to allow the drilling project to proceed. An application was submitted to the council for this week’s meeting for council approval of the project.

Council members voted 6-1 to allow subsurface horizontal drilling at 800 to 1,000 feet depths, ensuring the park’s surface and recreational areas remain unaffected. Royalties generated from the project will benefit the city, marking the third time Warren has entered into a similar agreement. The Betts Foundation was informed and is in support of the project.

City resident Ron Peterson asked several questions about the project, including how deep the drilling would go and if there had been studies done, including by the state Department of Environmental Protection, of horizontal drilling in the city of Warren.

“This particular location, how do we know it’s safe near a park?” Peterson asked.

Mayor Dave Wortman said all permitting is done through the state Department of Environmental Protection, which is tasked with making sure environmental regulations are followed.

“The parcel of land the pump jacks are going to be located on is across the highway behind the Days Inn,” Wortman said. “Based on the angle it will be drilling, it will access the subsurface under Betts Park. There will be no footprint at all, which is part of this agreement, on any of the city parks at all. To be transparent to any of the activity at Betts Park it won’t have an impact in any way, shape or form.”

Mike Holtz, city manager, said this is the third time the city has undertaken this type of drilling in Warren. Royalties generated by activity at the city near Paws Along the River generated $200K for the city, which paid for the city to purchase one of the fire trucks that is in service now.

“Yes, they’ve had a direct impact on the budget within the city,” Wortman said. “That’s what those funds have been used for in the past, to acquire capital goods for city operations.”

Councilwoman Danielle Flasher asked about possible impacts to the park and its users as well as depth, but said they were answered while Wortman answered Peterson’s questions. Councilwoman Wendy McCain also had questions before voting against the project.

“Betts Park is located in an area protected from drilling, is that correct?” McCain asked. “So it’s a preservation area. And then when we talk about horizontal drilling, that’s fracking, is a different term used.”

When Wortman said that’s not the case, McCain asked, “What’s the difference?”

Wortman said there is fracking regardless of how the drilling is done, whether it’s horizontal or vertical. Fracturing refers to the process of breaking up the rock so gas or oil can be extracted to an area where it can be pumped. McCain also asked about the depth of drilling, with Wortman answering 800 to 1,000 feet is roughly the typical depth for drilling in this part of Pennsylvania.

“From this place where the pump jacks are going to be, it’s going to be quite a distance,” Wortman said.

McCain asked about potential conflicts regarding Wortman and city Solicitor Andrea Stapleford since they have ties to the oil and gas industry. Both said the project doesn’t involve them or their families, and neither stand to gain financially.

“I didn’t think you had interest but I just want to make sure both of you are being objective because of both of your roles in this conversation,” McCain said.

“The implication you’re making is absolutely false,” Wortman said.

“It’s a question, not an implication,” McCain said.

“The way that you phrased it, it absolutely was,” Wortman responded. “I will gain nothing personally. I work in the oil and gas industry, that is correct. Neither I nor any of the companies I am associated with will have anything to do with the activity with Mr. Branch. We have no business relationship. I don’t benefit personally in any way. You know the definition of what a conflict of interest is and this certainly doesn’t meet it.”

“OK,” McCain responded. “A big part of conflict of interest has to do with judgment and objectivity.”

Stapleford then interjected, saying conflict of interest deals with financial gain to a person or a member of their immediate family from whatever the concentrated interest is. If there is no financial gain, there is no conflict, with Stapleford saying she can’t have a conflict because she doesn’t have a vote.

McCain also asked if the project had been to the Planning Commission, with city officials saying past drilling projects haven’t been taken to the Planning Commission either. McCain then asked why the council was rushing the process. A special meeting was called for late February after approval of the consent order wasn’t included on the council’s regular February meeting agenda, a decision McCain objected to at the time.

“It feels like there’s a rush. I’d be curious what the rush is and are we handling this the same as we handle all businesses?” McCain asked. “Are all businesses being treated equally when they want something like this?”

McCain said council members weren’t aware of the council resolution until they received the council agenda on Friday, which she said isn’t enough time to properly evaluate the project and come to a reasoned decision on a decision that involves public safety and drilling under a protected area. Wortman said this is an item that is available to be put on the agenda. It was put on the agenda with enough time for council members to prepare for it. Acting quickly, Wortman said, will help Branch proceed with the project quickly.

“At this point there has already been a significant transaction between two business owners to sell the oil, gas and mineral rights,” Wortman said. “There is a regulatory process that’s involved to make sure Mr Branch can proceed with the project. He’s got to line up the resources and the companies to do the actual work, which is the drilling of the wells, and procure the pump jacks. There is a lead time on any project of this magnitude. For us to sit and hold it artificially is not in the best interest of small business in this city.”

Councilman Phil Gilbert asked if there is a city right to terminate the lease. Stapleford said the language in the city’s approval is typical language. If no royalty payments are paid the city could terminate the lease, but the recourse for spills or other issues is typically handled by the state DEP. Councilman Jared Villella asked if spills or issues would be handled as if the spill was in any other industrial area — which Stapleford said would be the case.