The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors denied the transfer of county permits for the Las Flores Pipeline from ExxonMobil to Sable Offshore in a 4-1 vote on Nov. 4.
Prior to the hearing, community organizations held a rally during which various speakers delivered speeches regarding the importance of the hearing. Anusha Singh / Daily Nexus
In February, the Board of Supervisors deadlocked on the transfer of county permits in a 2:2 vote. No action was taken at that time to approve or deny the transfer, after Third District Supervisor Joan Hartmann recused herself since the pipeline runs near her property. Hartmann gained clearance from the California Fair Political Practices Commission to vote at this meeting.
The Santa Barbara County (SBC) Board of Supervisors discussed the transfer during the meeting, with Supervisors Laura Capps, Steve Lavagnino, Roy Lee and Hartmann voting to continue the item and prepare for the rejection of the permit transfer.
Prior to the hearing, members of the Environmental Defense Center (EDC), Santa Barbara Channelkeeper and UC Santa Barbara Stop Sable held a rally during which various speakers delivered speeches on the importance of the hearing and why the supervisors should not approve the permit.
Tara Rengifo, a senior attorney at the EDC, cited the legal trouble that Sable is currently in as a reason why the permit should not be transferred. In September, the SBC District Attorney’s Office charged Sable with 21 criminal charges, which included five felony counts. Additionally, the California Attorney General (AG)’s Office filed a lawsuit in October against Sable for violations during pipeline repair work and pollution of waterways.
“The AG describes Sable as having placed profits over environmental protection and calls its management misinformed, incompetent and incorrect at best,” Rengifo said. “Why should our county think Sable would act any differently here?”
Paasha Mahdavi, an associate professor in UCSB’s Department of Political Science, emphasized that his research shows that Sable’s operations will not lower gasoline prices, a reason that proponents have cited as a positive aspect of the company’s operations.
The rally concluded with a speech from Hannah-Beth Jackson, a former member of the California State Senate who served from 2012 to 2020. Jackson argued that Sable is a “scofflaw” that has been “following the Donald Trump playbook of ignoring the law.”
Following the rally, attendees entered the County Administration Building, where the hearing took place. The board hearing room was at capacity, filled with Sable employees and community members in opposition to Sable, many of whom were dressed in red to show solidarity in opposition to restarting the pipeline.
Once the hearing began, the supervisors introduced the permit transfer request and heard from representatives from Sable, ExxonMobil, the EDC and the Center for Biological Diversity.
The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors gathered on Nov. 4 to discuss the transfer, with Supervisors voting to continue the item and prepare for the rejection of the permit transfer. Anusha Singh / Daily Nexus
During public comment, 96 individuals — including some UCSB students — spoke about their opinions on the matter and why they were either in opposition to or in favor of the transfer of permits.
Third-year environmental studies major Lila Werland said they oppose the restart of the pipeline because of Sable’s “consistent disregard” for due process in restarting the pipeline. She mentioned that community members are worried about how “oil companies aren’t held responsible for cleaning up properly,” and cited the 2015 Refugio oil spill — which resulted in over 100,000 gallons of oil spilling into the ocean — as an example.
The Director of UCSB Coal Oil Point Reserve on the Goleta Coast, Christina Sandoval, discussed her role in educating the public on the preservation of the coastline. She spoke on the effects that the 2015 Refugio oil spill had on the wildlife, and claimed Sable isn’t paying “sufficiently for the damages they cause.”
“I do not support the renewal of the oil exploration on our coast based on this recent history of negligence and this regard for the environment, and because the direction we need it to go is renewable energy,” Sandoval said.
Second-year economics and environmental studies double major Sneha Namboodiri said that she believes Sable “threatens” the future of her health and safety and that oil spills bring a “devastating toll” to the environment.
Fifth-year environmental studies and communication double major, Associated Students Environmental Affairs Board co-chair and Stop Sable co-founder Jenna McGovern urged the supervisors to halt the transfer of permits to Sable.
“This utter disregard and disrespect is just a glimpse into what our future would look like if Sable takes over,” McGovern said. “The County’s decision today will mark whether we’re going to progress as a community or destroy our only home.”
Santa Barbara resident Mike Caldwell showed support for Sable, saying that he has been working with Sable for the last two years, helping with repairs. He said he believes there’s “no question whatsoever” they’d be able to operate the pipeline.
“I’ve been in the business myself for 40 years now. I’ve worked with a lot of different companies, but we strongly believe they’re capable of running the facility. Without a doubt, we’re in favor of them doing the work,” Caldwell said.
Santa Barbara resident and Sable employee Pascual Morales has worked on the Santa Ynez Unit and urged the county not to divide Sable employees from Santa Barbara.
“Let Santa Barbara be known as a place where we’ve learned from the past, where we’ve taken every precaution since 2015 and shown our mistakes don’t define us, how we learn from them does,” Morales said.
During deliberations from the board, Fifth District Supervisor Lavagnino, who originally voted for the transfer in February, said he could no longer support the transfer since he couldn’t agree that “Sable has the skills, training and resources to operate the facility in compliance with the permit and all applicable county codes.”
Hartmann also voted against Sable, as she was concerned about whether the company has the proper resources for any potential oil spills. She emphasized the county’s duty to protect local resources and suggested hiring consultants to analyze the insurance policies if a spill were to occur.
Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson was the only supervisor to vote in favor of transferring the permits. He said that ongoing prosecutions from the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s Office don’t “hold right” with him, acknowledging that SBC has also made environmental mistakes, such as sewage spills. Nelson went on to describe the meeting as “political theater” due to discussing Sable in “bad faith.”
“It’s interesting how some will pick and choose their outrage. I feel bad for the public and my colleagues. The public has been led to believe this denial today will somehow stop the restart,” Nelson said. “I believe it will not.”
Following deliberations, the board will continue to discuss the topic until Dec. 16, when county staff will draft a rejection of the permit transfer. They then voted on the motion, which was approved in a 4-1 vote.
A version of this article appeared on p. 7 of the Nov. 6 print edition of the Daily Nexus.
