First in a series
When is a ban not a ban even though what it set out to prohibit still is forbidden?

The whacky fracking world, both con and pro, scored another remarkable hiccup last week.

For years, the controversial horizontal oil drilling method has sparked both unconventional behavior and results.

Despite the muscular, untiring efforts of armies of environmental activists to outlaw fracking on grounds of destroying human health, the activists appear to have largely failed in their quest for two reasons:

• Cloudy research results.
• Heavyweight pushback by the oil and gas industry.

A headline last week said the city of Carson, which has endured a politically rollicking year, rescinded a ban on fracking that it had imposed three months earlier.

That much is true. Even juicier, though, is the news that despite the recission, fracking still is forbidden inside the Carson city limits.

The City Council voted 4-1 last Tuesday to lift the ban – just not enough to create daylight.

Carson City Manager Ken Farfsing explained the fascinating background change of heart that, at least technically, is not a change of fact, to the Daily Breeze:

“The city reached settlement agreements with the oil operators in Carson that have protections that prevent fracking.

“The city has major concerns that the fracking ban was pre-empted by state law – and, if adopted by the city, would be overturned by the courts.”

By killing the ban on paper, Carson still has a ban on fracking in real life. When Carson City Hall agreed to drop the ban terminology, gas and oil operators agreed not to sue the city over recently adopted regulations described as some of California’s most stringent.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

(To be continued)