Wow, that was pretty in-depth. Good find!
I think there are a lot of good points made by both sides here. Yes, ND is doing well, but they also need to think about the future when the oil potentially runs out or (as certain people would suggest) we open up drilling offshore and in national parks, which could lower oil prices (well, the proponents say this is why they want to do it)--but this could make it uneconomical to drill in the Bakken until prices rise again. As was pointed out in the article, ND had too much infrastructure to start off, and infrastructure that goes without use is wasted. If it becomes uneconomical to drill the Bakken, the workers move out, and we're stuck with "too much" again (I'm thinking specifically of the housing-building boom in Williston right now that was highlighted in the "Running with Oil" special series by Forum Communications.
As an aside, I don't think the Bakken was even on the radar in the 80s because it was uneconomical to drill and not even attainable until horizontal drilling became more widespread. The general (safer) term for the area is the Williston Basin, which contains rocks that were deposited when that region was being forced downward (and underwater, hence the rocks being deposited) as recently as around 70 million years ago. The center of the basin is, of course, near Williston, ND. Oil isn't available everywhere, but many of the horizons are (or were) producing. The Bakken itself is only about two meters thick.
I'm concerned that this article only touches upon the education of undergraduates and instead focuses on research. With "33 to 35 percent" of students sticking in North Dakota, it's prime for business startups who are seeking an educated workforce, but we don't see that type of investment. It would be great to see UND and NDSU lead the way in focusing on undergraduate education by increasing the number of professors (not graduate students), decreasing class sizes, and cultivating a sense of serious work ethic. If the majority of students graduating in ND had the amazing qualities that the older generations of North Dakotans seem to love talking about (work ethic, fiscal responsibility, outgoing nature, attention to detail, etc.), this state could be a great place to get an education and to live.
Rather than research money coming in to the universities, going out to the state, and then coming back to the universities, I'd like to see more in-house transfer of funds. Over 35% of grant money goes back to UND, but does that money go back to the primary purpose of the school (educating undergrads), or does it get rolled back into R&D? Where is the balance?