Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and health advocates urge council to revive oil phase‑out protections after court setback
Summary
Advocates and residents used public comment to press the City Council to agendize a motion on acid maintenance and to restore oil-phase-out protections that they say were removed by a court decision.
Residents, health advocates and environmental groups urged the Los Angeles City Council during public comment to take immediate steps to protect neighborhoods from so‑called acid maintenance work at oil wells and to restore a previously passed ordinance that, they said, was overturned in court.
Speakers representing community groups and health organizations asked Council Member David Ryu Nazarian (referenced by commenters) and the Energy and Environment Committee to agendize council file 24-1580, described by multiple speakers as the asset‑maintenance motion addressing acid jobs. "We urge council member Nazarian to agendize the asset maintenance motion at the next Energy and Environment Committee hearing," said Camille Samuels, identified in public comment as a PhD researcher and environmental justice fellow with Black Wind for Wellness. "We call on city council to rescind the old oil phase out ordinance and pass a new ordinance as soon as possible," Samuels said.
Other commenters said that since a judge overturned the city's oil phase‑out ordinance in September 2024, they have seen an increase in acid maintenance projects and reported health and odor impacts in neighborhoods such as Wilmington. Emma Silver, Climate Justice Associate at Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles, told the council: "These projects are highly toxic with lots of negative health impacts... our communities cannot wait any longer for these projects to stop." Several speakers urged the council to prioritize frontline communities and to move the asset‑maintenance motion forward immediately.
Speakers named the same council file repeatedly during public comment: "council file 24‑1580" (as read aloud at the microphone). Some commenters said they had sent letters to Council Member Nazarian asking that the motion be agendized and that they had not yet received a response.
No committee action on council file 24‑1580 was recorded on the council floor during this meeting. The public comment record shows persistent, organized pressure from multiple community groups to bring the matter to committee consideration.
Why it matters Acid maintenance work at oil sites uses chemicals that speakers described as hazardous; community groups said the work is being conducted near homes, schools and health facilities and that its resumption after the court ruling creates an urgent public‑health concern. Commenters asked the council to act administratively—by agendizing the motion and passing an ordinance—rather than leaving protections to slower regulatory or court processes.
What commenters asked for - Agendize council file 24‑1580 (the asset‑maintenance motion) for the Energy and Environment Committee. - Rescind the court‑overturned oil phase‑out ordinance and pass a new ordinance protecting frontline communities. - Prioritize public health and environmental justice over industry operations in neighborhoods already experiencing high pollution burdens.
The council proceeded to other business after public comment; the transcript records the council adopting item 7 (a wildfire state‑of‑emergency measure) later in the meeting. Public‑comment speakers said they will continue to press elected officials and committee chairs to bring council file 24‑1580 to committee for formal consideration.
