Residents and council members press city for action on Rancho LPG and Jones Chemical hazards

Councilmember Tim McOsker urged the Planning and Land Use Management Committee to move quickly on safety reviews of two longtime hazardous sites, saying the Rancho LPG storage in San Pedro and Jones Chemical in Harbor Gateway pose lingering, acute risks to nearby communities and infrastructure.

"Each of them creates significant, significant risk of loss of life and property," McOsker said, describing Rancho LPG as a site that was not approved for butane and holding what he characterized as "25 million gallons" of the fuel. He asked departments to report back on whether and how those uses could be discontinued or brought into compliance.

The committee then heard roughly two hours of public testimony from residents and community groups. Adele Healy of San Pedro called Rancho a "ticking time bomb," warning that a single incident could damage local neighborhoods and the port. Cynthia Babich of the Action Committee described Jones Chemical as an operable unit of the Montrose Superfund site and cited high pollution burden scores for surrounding ZIP codes.

Several speakers said Jones Chemical had been cited for numerous violations and lacks basic safety systems, including up‑to‑date permits and alarms. Rick Thomas, who has covered the site for local media, said the Los Angeles Fire Department had identified dozens of violations and recommended demolition and remediation in lieu of piecemeal fixes.

Representatives also framed the issue as one of environmental justice. Sean Kearns, field representative for Congresswoman Nanette Barragán, said the facilities have been found in violation of federal, state and local laws and that modest penalties have not prevented repeat problems. He said the federal Risk Management Program applies to these types of facilities and that federal policy changes could affect local risk.

The motion approved on consent instructed city departments to prepare analyses and next steps to address compliance and community safety at the two properties. The committee did not adopt a direct enforcement action on the floor but directed staff to return with reports that would outline possible regulatory or land‑use steps.

The next steps in the item are a staff report back on the feasibility of discontinuing the hazardous uses, whether code or permit change is required, and recommended enforcement options or land‑use remedies. The meeting record shows broad public support for more aggressive action and repeated requests for enforceable relocation or remediation plans.