Fracking has grown rapidly across the United States over the past decade, reforming energy landscapes and governance. A vast body of research has explored how public opinion on fracking varies spatially. The context-specific results suggest that those closer to fracking are more supportive of the industry, while support decreases along partisan lines as proximity to fracking recedes. We use state-collected fracking data and coded legislative testimonies to detail the first density-based proximity logit analysis of policy actor positionality on Colorado Senate Bill 19-181 (SB19-181), a bill overhauling fracking governance in favor of stricter regulations. Proximity findings show that as recent fracking density increases, SB19-181 policy actors are more likely to oppose SB19-181. However, as historical fracking density increases, they are more likely to support SB19-181. Furthermore, partisanship is a strong predictor of positionality. Democrats are always more likely to support SB19-181, while republicans express the opposite trend. However, density and time do affect partisanship. Democrats in low-density ZCTAs are more likely to support SB19-181 than their highdensity counterparts. Notably, high-densities of historical fracking are the only spatial location where republican policy actors are more likely to support SB19-181. Findings also indicate more participation in zero-and low-density ZCTAs, meaning fracking development does not necessitate interest in its governance.