Colorado Oil and Gas Association


Mission Statement

Founded in 1984, COGA’s purpose is to foster and promote the beneficial, efficient, responsible, and environmentally sound development, production, and use of Colorado’s oil and natural gas resources. COGA is a nationally recognized trade association that aggressively promotes the expansion of Rocky Mountain oil and natural gas markets, supply, and transportation infrastructure through its growing and diverse membership.”


The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) is an organization dedicated to supporting the oil and gas industry. The group has regularly defended the safety of oil and gas operations in Colorado, and opposed efforts to implement new health and safety requirements. They have opposed fracking bans and moratoriums, and have sued to overturn them. The group also opposes local oversight over oil and gas development and seeks to limit citizen activism against the oil and gas industry.

Notable Activities and Statements on Public Lands Policy 

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) has regularly defended the health and safety record of oil and gas operations in Colorado.

COGA Assured Residents and Elected Officials Wells Were Safe After Fatal Explosions. After two companies shut down wells following fatal explosions, COGA president Dan Haley assured residents near the wells they were safe saying in a statement, “’Extraordinary measures are taking place to confirm that our communities are safe,’ … Haley urged elected officials to be cautious about making policy decisions until the investigation is complete. [Dan Elliott, “2nd company shuts oil, gas wells after fatal Colorado blast,” Associated Press, 04/28/17]

After Wells Were Shut Down by Two Companies Following Fatal Explosions, COGA President Dan Haley Claimed Safety Was a “Top Value.” ‘We understand some communities are rightly concerned and want to protect their citizens,’ [Haley] said. ‘The oil and gas industry and all of our operators share that desire to protect residents, as the safety of our neighbors, friends and workers is our top value.’” [Dan Elliott, “2nd company shuts oil, gas wells after fatal Colorado blast,” Associated Press, 04/28/17]

COGA Claimed the Failure of 428 Wells to Pass Inspections and Two Fatal Explosions Represented a “Miniscule” failure rate. COGA said that mandatory tests after two fatal explosions confirmed that the oil and gas industry had high safety standards. Although 428 wells failed inspection, COGA president Dan Haley said  the ‘failure rate was minuscule, confirming the high safety standards the industry practices, we need to continue to work and innovate and find ways to be even safer. We hope these results alleviate any of the concerns that may still be out there regarding flow lines, and that they serve as a positive step toward rebuilding public trust.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Energy companies have checked 120,000 gas pipelines across Colorado; here’s what they found,” Denver Business Journal, 08/21/17]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Dismissed Stories of Illegal Dumping of Radioactive Waste. COGA “Doesn’t See Disposal of Low Level Radioactive Waste in Landfills as A Problem.” In September 2017, state health officials announced they had discovered “Colorado landfills have been illegally burying low level radioactive waste from the oil and gas industry that they are not approved to handle.” According to the Denver Post, “COGA doesn’t see disposal of low level radioactive waste in landfills as a problem. ‘While circumstances may be different in other states, there have been no indications this is an issue for oil and gas waste in Colorado,’ reads the statement attributed to COGA president Dan Haley. ‘We have spoken with the state, with members of the waste industry, and others to begin exploring the realities of this matter.’” [Bruce Finley, “Waste being buried illegally,” Denver Post, 09/22/17]

  • COGA Said it was “Not Aware of Any Illegal Activity” in Illegal Waste Dumping. Responding to the news of illegally disposed radioactive waste from oil and gas operations, COGA president Dan Haley said, “’COGA is not aware of any illegal activity and we support state regulations for waste disposal of all types. While circumstances may be different in other states, we are not aware of any wastes containing TENORM at elevated levels being disposed of at any facility in Colorado. We have spoken with the state, with members of the waste industry, and others to begin exploring this further.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Colorado wants more information about radioactive oil and gas waste at landfills,” Denver Business Journal, 09/22/17]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) opposes efforts to implement new health and safety requirements.

COGA Opposed Bill To Prevent More Fracking Accidents After Fatal Explosion. The COGA opposed the first bill aimed at preventing explosions near homes in the wake of two fatal explosions in April 2017. House Democrats introduced a bill “ordering the COGCC to create and share a map of oil and gas pipelines.” COGA president Dan Haley opposed the bill testifying at a committee hearing: “We understand the feeling and the need to do something, but we think this locks us into an inappropriate solution and we think it could slow down the process… Please allow the industry and the state to complete their work.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Colorado lawmakers get first bill in response to fatal home explosion linked to gas line,” Denver Business Journal, 05/05/17]

COGA Said Legislature Did Not Have Time to Pass Law Dealing With Safety in Wake of Explosions. COGA said there wasn’t enough time before the end of the session to pass a bill “[i]n response to a fatal explosion of a home in Firestone.” The bill proposed by Democratic legislators “would require oil and gas companies to inform the state where their pipelines are located and for the state to create an online mapping database for the public.” COGA president Dan Haley said “the industry is concerned because the legislation requires statewide mapping of pipelines regulated by different agencies, which could create ‘significant conflict.’ There is not enough time before the end of the legislative session to fully vet the issues, he said. ‘We have many questions and a need for clarification on the jurisdiction issue on these things,’ Haley testified during the committee hearing. ‘I think this is one of the most important discussions we need in the coming weeks and months.’” [Christopher N. Osher, “Dem bill seeks pipe mapping,” Denver Post, 05/06/17]

COGA Offered Only Conditional Support for New Regulations on Air Emissions. COGA “largely supported” new regulations on emissions from production facilities proposed by the Air Quality Control Commission “on the condition it would not be applied statewide.” [Bruce Finley, “Tougher oil, gas rules mulled,” Denver Post, 10/21/17]

  • COGA President Haley Said Additional Regulations Could Actually Increase Emissions. After COGA said it would conditionally support air emissions regulations, COGA President Dan Haley said, “’Industry worked hard, along with other stakeholders, to find a compromise,’ Haley told The Denver Post. However, he added, ‘more inspections doesn’t equate to cost effective emissions reductions. In fact, additional inspections could actually increase emissions as we drive more to these sites and find fewer and fewer leaks.’” [Bruce Finley, “Tougher oil, gas rules mulled,” Denver Post, 10/21/17]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Opposed A Court Ruling Halting New Permits Until an Independent Party Proves Fracking is Not Hazardous.

  • COGA Condemns Court of Appeal Ruling in Martinez Case as Elevating Environmental Protection. In March 2017, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued a ruling requiring “the state’s oil and gas conservation commission to consider the petition from Martinez’ group and stop issuing permits for new sites until an independent party proves fracking can be done without harming public health or environment.” The COGA, issued a statement saying, “The ruling throws out decades of precedent encouraging this balancing test, and instead elevates environmental protection as the primary goal of the Act. It’s clear the COGCC has employed this balancing act on numerous occasions as evidenced by Colorado’s comprehensive regulations, which are among the most stringent in that nation.” [Drew Engelbart, “Boulder teens score legal victory against oil & gas industry,” FOX – 31 KDVR, 03/24/17]
  • COGA Urged Attorney General to Meet “Irresponsible” Lawsuit Backers “Head On.” COGA backed the Colorado Attorney General’s decision to appeal of the Martinez case. COGA president Dan Haley said “‘Those who filed this lawsuit have said they want to ban oil and gas in our state. That irresponsible position, funded by the same out of state groups that have relentlessly tried to ban our industry via the ballot box, must be met head on.’” [Bruce Finley, “Hick orders a halt to fight,” Denver Post, 05/19/17]
  • COGA Welcomed Appeal and Review of Martinez Case. COGA welcomed Colorado Supreme Court review of the Martinez case. COGA president Dan Haley said in a statement that “the law directs the commission to balance a variety of development interests, including the environment. ‘The COGCC, which voted unanimously to appeal this decision to the Colorado Supreme Court, has employed this strict balancing act on countless occasions as evidenced by Colorado’s comprehensive regulations, which are among the most stringent in that nation,’ Haley said.” [Amelia Arvesen, “State high court to hear appeal in oil and gas lawsuit,” Denver Post, 01/30/18]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Has Been Highly Critical of Fracking Bans and Moratoriums.

COGA Said it was “Disappointed” by Broomfield Moratorium. COGA opposed a move by the city of Broomfield to impose a six-month moratorium on new oil and gas permits in response to one company’s plans for 141 new wells at four sites within the city.  The city had previously passed a five-year moratorium that was invalidated by a state court. According to the Denver Business Journal, “Dan Haley, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, which sued Broomfield over its first moratorium, said the group was ‘disappointed’ by the council’s vote. ‘A moratorium, should they choose to go that route, will inhibit economic activity in that area and deny mineral rights owners access to their property rights. We remain committed to coming to the table to work with Broomfield,’ Haley said. However, he added, ‘If they choose to go that route, we will review all options available to us.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Broomfield may impose moratorium on oil and gas development,” Denver Business Journal, 12/07/16]

COGA Said Broomfield Made Right Call by Postponing Passage of “Divisive Moratorium.” COGA declared victory when the Broomfield City Council postponed action on a 6-month moratorium on applications for oil and gas drilling in favor of working with the industry on “long-term planning efforts with plans for oil and gas development and refiling the applications at a later date.” COGA president Dan Haley said, the council “made the right call” by not voting to impose what he called “a divisive moratorium in the community. The industry is listening, and will continue to make every effort to address the questions and concerns posed by the council and members of the community.” [Cathy Proctor, “Broomfield council postpones 6-month oil and gas ban – indefinitely,” Denver Business Journal, 03/01/17]

COGA Called Boulder Moratorium “Plainly Illegal.” COGA opposed Boulder’s proposed regulation on oil and gas drilling, including the renewal of a moratorium on new permits. It was reported that “a Nov. 7 letter from Dan Haley, the president and CEO of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, the trade group involved in the Supreme Court cases, said elements of the proposed regulations were illegal under state law…. As for the potential for a new, multi-year moratorium, Haley said that ‘it is COGA’s firm position that any effort at imposing a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in Boulder is plainly illegal under the Fort Collins decision.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Boulder County considering new oil and gas regulations, moratorium,” Denver Business Journal, 11/14/16]

COGA Encouraged State AG to Sue Over Boulder County Fracking Moratorium. COGA welcomed the intervention of the Colorado Attorney General in threatening to sue Boulder County if it reinstated a fracking moratorium. COGA president Dan Haley said: “We welcome the state’s leadership and clarity on this issue and we support the Attorney General’s position that the continued ban on oil and gas development in Boulder County violates state law. This is up to Boulder County now. They have had five years to study this issue. If they want to best serve their community, they will lift the moratorium and work with industry on responsibly developing natural resources in their county.” [Caitlin Hendee, “Colorado attorney general threatens Boulder County with legal action over oil and gas moratorium,” Denver Business Journal, 01/26/17]

COGA Condemned Boulder Fracking Ordinance as “Unrealistic Regulatory Standards.” In March 2017, Boulder County passed anti-fracking ordinances that “commissioners described as ‘the most stringent in the state of Colorado [that] will serve to employ the county’s land use authority to protect local public health and the environment’” COGA president Dan Haley responded in a statement warning “that elements of the county’s new regulations are illegal. ‘After a five year moratorium, it’s not surprising that Boulder County passed unrealistic regulatory standards designed to roadblock responsible energy production.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Boulder County says its new oil and gas rules are the ‘most stringent’ in Colorado,” Denver Business Journal, 03/23/17]

COGA Claimed Boulder County’s Fracking Regulations Did Not Follow the Law. In a statement responding to Boulder County’s March 2017 fracking ban, COGA president Dan Haley said, “Our industry remains committed to conversations and flexible approaches that fall within the rule of law. Aspects of Boulder County’s regulations clearly do not,’ Haley said.” [Cathy Proctor, “Boulder County says its new oil and gas rules are the ‘most stringent’ in Colorado,” Denver Business Journal, 03/23/17]

COGA Called Lafayette Anti-Fracking Ordinance a “Slap in the Face to the Business Community.” The COGA condemned the Lafayette City Council’s action to pass a measure banning fracking operations in the city. COGA president Dan Haley said, “Even though a last-ditch effort removed language that would tie the hands of police officers and legalize direct action protest, the measure is still a slap in the face to the business community, which is why so many business leaders have spoken out against the measure,” COGA’s President and Chief Executive Dan Haley said in a statement through a representative on Wednesday. This is not a serious or thoughtful effort to address any potential legitimate concerns Lafayette may have about businesses working in their city.” [Anthony Hahn, “As Lafayette fracking ban measure moves forward, proponents wary of its strength,” Daily Camera, 03/08/17]

COGA Called on Lafayette to Respect “Individual Property Rights” Below the Surface. After Lafayette proposed a one-year moratorium on new oil and gas drilling in the city, the move drew a “swift reproach” from COGA. Its president, Dan Haley, said, “As communities grow and expand, it is important to keep in mind Colorado’s long history of resource development, its value to our economy and national security, and the respect we must maintain for individual property rights on the surface and below.” [Anthony Hahn, “COGA president reproaches Lafayette’s proposed fracking moratorium ahead of vote,” Daily Camera, 09/29/17].

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Has a History of Filing Lawsuits to Overturn Fracking Bans and Setbacks.

COGA Sued Longmont, CO After It Passed a Fracking Ban. In 2012, Longmont, CO, passed a measure that would ban fracking. COGA “contends the ban is illegal because it denies mineral owners the right to develop their property and blocks operations that state laws allow” and went to court to ask that the measure be invalidated. Earlier in the year, CO Governor John Hickenlooper directed state attorneys to sue Longmont after the city council had passed harsher regulations on zoning authority regarding oil and gas. Hicklenlooper said that while the state would not sue Longmont again regarding the measure passed by voters, it would join any lawsuit brought on by companies. [Bruce Finley, “Longmont sued by Colorado oil and gas industry,” Times-Call, 12/17/12]

After Fort Collins, CO, Passed A Five-Year Moratorium on Fracking, COGA Filed a Lawsuit. After Fort Collins, CO, passed a five-year moratorium in November 2013, COGA sued the city in December of that same year. The case made its way to the Colorado Supreme Court, which turned down Fort Collins’ appeal. After the decision to overturn the appeal, COGA CEO Dan Healy said: “This is not just a win for the energy industry, but for the people of Colorado who rely on affordable and dependable energy and a strong economy. It sends a strong message to anyone trying to drive this vital industry out of the state that those efforts will not be tolerated.” [Jacy Marmaduke, “High court strikes down Fort Collins’ halt to fracking,” Coloradoan, 05/02/16]

COGA Sued Broomfield, CO, Over Its Fracking Moratorium.  In 2013, the city of Broomfield, CO, passed a moratorium that would prohibit fracking within the city and county limits. COGA sued the city, saying that this was a prohibition of oil and gas development in the state. [National Law Review, “Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Sues Broomfield Seeking to Invalidate its Hydraulic Fracturing Ban, 12/04/14]

COGA Sued the City of Thornton Over 750 foot Setback Ordinance. COGA and Colorado oil and gas officials, including the head of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association (COGA), the head of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC), and the Assistant Attorney General assigned to the COGCC sued the City of Thornton over regulations it passed that require a “750-foot setback between well pads and production facilities and existing or planned homes. The proposal also calls for 500-foot setbacks between oil and gas operations and water bodies or irrigation ditches.” COGA president Dan Haley issued a statement saying the group had “’submitted multiple letters articulating serious legal concerns with Thornton’s proposed regulations, particularly regarding operational preemption.  Those concerns were ignored, making it necessary to challenge Thornton’s regulations in court.’” [Cathy Proctor, “Colorado city’s new oil and gas regulations are illegal, suit claims,” Denver Business Journal, 10/10/17]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Opposes Local Oversight Over Oil and Gas Operations.

COGA Said Locals Control “Some Surface Issues,” But Should Not Control Oil and Gas. COGA president Dan Haley said that the state faces a loss of investment if local governments try and control oil and gas activity within their boundaries.  Haley said, “’Oil and gas is where it is. It has been there a long time. It does not respect municipal boundaries. And while locals certainly have control over land use and some surface issues, it is best because oil and gas is of statewide interest that the state is the regulator of this industry,’ he said. ‘If you create this patchwork of rules, you will cause millions of dollars of investment to go elsewhere.’” [Bruce Finley, “More News,” Denver Post, 08/24/17]

COGA Said Legislation Giving Local Governments Control was “Part of a Political Agenda.” COGA condemned the introduction of the PROTECT Act in the Colorado legislature that would give local governments authority over oil and gas production within their limits.  COGA president Dan Haley said the sponsor, Sen. Matt Jones “has a track record of ‘supporting efforts or legislation to ban Colorado’s oil and gas industry’ and called the PROTECT Act “part of a political agenda.’ [Cathy Proctor, “Colorado’s 2018 legislative fight over oil and gas has already begun,” Denver Business Journal, 12/06/17]

COGA Claimed “The Most Appropriate Forum” for Regulating Oil and Gas was the State. Haley said pulling oil and gas out of the ground is different from other industries in that the underground resources don’t follow the boundaries of the cities and counties above them.  ‘Which plainly means that strong state oversight is the most appropriate forum for regulatory authority over development,’ Haley said, adding that the COGCC and the state’s health department are the agencies that manage the state’s regulations to protect the environment, communities and oil and gas employees.  ‘While we haven’t seen the language, the PROTECT Act appears to dismiss the rules on the books, as well as the fact that Colorado has the most technologically advanced, strictly regulated and well-controlled oil and natural gas operations of anywhere in the nation,” Haley said.” [Cathy Proctor, “Colorado’s 2018 legislative fight over oil and gas has already begun,” Denver Business Journal, 12/06/17]

COGA Called Court Ruling “A Guide” for Local Governments Regarding Oil Regulations. In April 2018, a Colorado state court’s decision overturned a Thornton City rule requiring “750 foot buffers and pipeline safety to protect residents from intensifying oil and gas activity… because they conflict with more permissive state law.” The COGA warned that local governments who attempted to enact similar rules more protective than state laws would be challenged: “’This ruling, again, spells out quite clearly that local governments cannot pass rules that conflict with the state’s authority to regulate oil and gas development and the federal government’s authority to regulate gathering lines. Those communities that choose to do so will simply continue wasting the hard earned dollars of their taxpayers,’ COGA president Dan Haley said Wednesday in a statement. ‘This ruling should be used as a guide for those local governments on the northern Front Range that are currently reworking their oil and gas regulations.’” [Bruce Finley, “State law overrides city rules on oil, gas,” Denver Post, 04/26/18]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Said Compliance With Local Pipeline Ordinances Did Not Indicate Legal Agreement. It was reported that “local drilling operators have each provided maps revealing the locations of oil and gas flowlines throughout the town, signaling their compliance with regulations denounced as “unlawful” and “overarching” by top industry officials.” However, The Colorado Oil and Gas Association cautioned against assuming that this meant the industry regarded the regulations as legal: “’Other local governments in Colorado have enacted what we feel are overarching and unlawful measures,’ Haley told trustees prior to a vote on the mapping ordinance in September. ‘We would encourage you not to presume that those measures are valid just because they haven’t been legally challenged yet.’ [Anthony Hahn, “Drilling operators complying with Erie’s new flowline mapping rules, town says,” Daily Camera, 02/25/18]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Claimed Pipelines Could be “Kept Secret”from Local Governments Due to Terrorism Concerns.In February, 2018, Colorado introduced new oil and gas pipeline regulations, which contained a provision that “let operators refuse to share pipeline location information with local governments.” It was reported that “Colorado Oil and Gas Association attorneys pressed the case that all pipelines are ‘critical infrastructure’ that legally can be kept secret to guard against terrorism.” [Bruce Finley, “State toughens oil, gas rule,” Denver Post, 02/14/18]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Opposed a Local Measure Requiring the Broomfield City Council to Consider Public Health and Safety Before Approving Oil Wells. The COGA released a statement opposing Broomfield City’s Measure 301, which would “require the City council to take into account the health and safety of residents before approving any new well.” The statement said, “The measure to amend Broomfield’s city charter is a clear attempt to overrun the state’s legal authority and ignores the collaborative progress Broomfield leaders have made over the past year developing recommendations for future energy development within the community. Question 301 is an affront to that collaboration, led by a divisive group of anti-oil and gas activists who will only be happy with an outright ban of one of Colorado’s most critical industries.” [Joe St. George, “Broomfield voting on controversial oil and gas measure,” FOX – 31 KDVR, 10/27/17]

  • COGA Said Passage of Broomfield Measure 301 was “An Affront” to Collaboration With City. After Broomfield City passed Measure 301, COGA once again condemned the measure and threatened to sue, saying in a statement: “The measure to amend Broomfield’s city charter is a clear attempt to overrun the state’s legal authority and ignores the collaborative progress Broomfield leaders have made over the past year developing recommendations for future energy development within the community,” the Colorado Oil and Gas Association said in a statement.  Question 301 is an affront to that collaboration, led by a divisive group of anti-oil and gas activists who will only be happy with an outright ban of one of Colorado’s most critical industries.” [Web Staff, “Broomfield oil and gas measure passes, expected to face legal fight,” FOX – 31 KDVR, 11/07/17]

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association (COGA) Opposes Protests and Activism Against the Oil and Gas Industry.

COGA Claimed There Was a “Rise in Activism” and the Oil and Gas Industry was “Under Attack.” At the annual meeting of the COGA, president Dan Haley characterized the oil and gas industry as “under attack,” saying: “We’ve seen a rise in activism this year and we’ve seen the public discourse in Colorado take a nasty turn as the rhetoric is more inflamed. They’ve disrupted public meetings, shouted down public speakers and shut down rec centers,’ he said, referring to a meeting in Erie organized by Anadarko Petroleum Corp. in September. ‘We’ve been called rapists and meth heads in public testimony at the legislature and those people saying that have not been gaveled out of order or reprimanded,” he said.” [Cathy Proctor, “’We are under attack,’ says head of Colorado Oil & Gas Association,” Denver Business Journal, 11/09/17]

COGA Warned Lafayette Not to Allow Peaceful Protests. In April 2018, the City of Lafayette proposed changes to its laws that would “tweak the city’s trespass codes to protect nonviolent drilling protesters from prosecution.” COGA condemned the changes, which could lead to more protests against drilling: “’It is fundamentally important for any civil society that local law enforcement not be prevented from arresting or detaining those engaged in criminal trespass,’ Colorado Oil and Gas Association’s President and Chief Executive Dan Haley said earlier this year. Ordinances that encourage criminal trespass would most certainly present a safety risk to citizens. Local laws cannot preempt the state’s constitutional protection of private property rights, whether those rights exist on the surface or below it.’” [Anthony Hahn, “Pressured by activists, Lafayette may tweak trespass codes to protect drilling protesters,” Daily Camera, 04/29/18]

  • COGA Said Lafayette City Ordinance “Ties the Hands of Our Police.” Opposing an anti-fracking measure in Lafayette, Colorado, which contained a controversial provision allowing civil disobedience against fracking operations, COGA president Dan Haley stated, “While this measure is supposedly targeted at oil and gas … it is going to affect anyone doing business in Lafayette. Any ordinance that ties the hands of our police officers and allows citizens to disrupt the operations of a business they simply don’t like is of great concern to the entire business community.” [Anthony Hahn, “Lafayette’s anti-fracking proposal to return for vote amid increased strain,” Daily Camera, 03/05/17]

Lobbying and Political Contributions

Lobbyist Name and Years Employed

Colorado Legislative Services: 2010-current

James Cole: 2010-current

Melanie Layton: 2010-current

Garin Vorthmann: 2010-current

Benjamin Goff: 2007-2012

John Greg Schnacke: 2001-2012

J. Greg Schnacke: 2007-2012

Karen Ostrander-Krug: 2001-2012

[Source: Colorado Secretary of State]

Payments to Colorado Legislative Services

2014: $98,000

2015: $100,940

2016: $103,969

2017: $103,969

Total: $406,878


Other Notable Payments listed in 990s


Colorado Legislative Services (Legal) $103,969

[Source:  COGA Form 990 2016]


Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, Schreck (Legal) $462,244

Colorado Legislative Services (Legal) $100,940

[Source:  COGA Form 990 2015]

Political Contributions

Top 10 Recipients of Colorado Oil & Gas Association Contributions

2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 TOTAL
Raise the Bar – Protect Our Constitution $42,800 $42,800
Senate Majority Fund $2,500 $5,000 $5,000 $8,500 $5,500 $26,500
Colorado Leadership Fund LLC $2,500 $8,500 $6,000 $17,000
Colorado Citizens’ Alliance $4,500 $3,500 $8,000
Mainstream Colorado $6,000 $6,000
Common Sense Values $2,500 $2,500 $5,000
Priorities for Colorado $3,500 $3,500
Coloradans For Fairness $2,500 $2,500
Our Colorado Values $2,500 $2,500
Values First Colorado $2,500 $2,500
TOTAL (All Contributions) $10,000 $5,000 $57,300 $23,550 $21,000 $116,850

(Includes COGA and Fund for Colorado’s Energy Future; Excludes transfers between them)

[Source: Colorado Secretary of State

Contributions to Elected Officials


Attorney General Cynthia Coffman (CO): $550

State Senator Ray Scott (CO): $550

State Senator Jerry Sonnenberg (CO): $200

State Representative Perry Lynn Buck (CO): $200

[Source: Colorado Secretary of State/]