Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Environment Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Carbajal office urges full review of Sable pipeline restart; board meets in closed session, reports no action

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors · January 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A representative for Rep. Salud Carbajal urged Santa Barbara County supervisors to demand full transparency before allowing Sable Offshore to restart a corroded pipeline tied to the 2015 Refugio oil spill; the board met in closed session on Sable litigation and reported no reportable action.

Erica Reyes, speaking on behalf of U.S. Rep. Salud Carbajal, told the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 5 that Sable Offshore’s push to restart the corroded pipeline that caused the 2015 Refugio oil spill "is deeply troubling" and said the matter warrants a thorough, transparent review rather than an emergency restart. "Nothing about this situation warrants an emergency restart," Reyes said.

Reyes said the pipeline spilled "123,000 gallons" of crude oil in 2015, affected "150 miles" of California coastline and required cleanup work she described as costing "hundreds of millions" of dollars. She criticized what she described as a late-December emergency federal permit and a sudden federal shift in oversight control that, she said, appeared to bypass the State Fire Marshal and normal state oversight. Reyes urged local officials to demand full transparency from federal agencies and to ensure a complete review of pipeline safety before any restart.

County Counsel had earlier read closed-session items that included existing litigation: Sable Offshore Corp. v. County of Santa Barbara, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 2:25-cv-04165), and one anticipated litigation matter. The board recessed into closed session for those matters and, after reconvening, County Counsel reported the board had met on both items and "took no reportable action." The board adjourned the special meeting until Jan. 13.

The statements from Reyes were delivered as public comment; the transcript shows no immediate official response or action taken in open session. The board’s reported closed-session outcome means any deliberations occurred in private under the statutory closed-session exception for litigation.