Lawsuits

Why the Lawsuit?

It is the intent of this order and proposition to provide funds to benefit property and improve the quality of life in the District by preserving and protecting the beach, wildlife, park, recreation and natural lands of the District, providing safer recreation areas for all residents, preventing gangs, developing and improving recreation facilities for senior citizens, planting trees, building trails and restoring rivers and streams.     

Section 16, parts (a) and (b), of Proposition A restricts the use of any monies generated from properties acquired with Proposition A funds to that same purpose for which the property was acquired.  That would be to preserve open space, and would not include oil drilling, nor would it include using oil royalties for general city services.

The lease could have been challenged before it was signed in 2008 if it had been broadly made known and the issues made clear.  The lease did, however, set in motion the “process” which includes an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifying environmental hazards and how they may be mitigated, or lessened, leading up to the city council voting on a conditional use permit allowing or not the oil companies to drill. 

The oil companies have provided the City with escrow funds (approximately $400,000) to pay for the EIR.  They have also paid for television ads promoting oil drilling in the hills.  The oil companies are counting on drilling for oil, and anticipate the necessary conditional use permit will be granted when the “process” is complete.  None of this answers the question whether oil drilling will be permitted by the County in light of  the conditions set by Proposition A.  Proposition A monies come through countywide property tax assessments.   Will the County allow oil drilling, and if it does, how much of the 30% oil royalties to Whittier would have to be given up for the benefit of all county residents, and probably for the benefit of all California residents.  And of the remaining royalty sums, their use is restricted. 

Our city council has set in motion the commitment of our special preserve property, for decades, when there is issue as to the legality to do so.  The potential oil royalty revenue to Whittier is uncertain, and would be restricted in its use.  The argument the council and pro oil advocates make is quite vague—it being that oil will potentially bring millions of dollars to the City.  But to what use will it be, and is it worth the price of additional air pollution, more noise, heavy truck traffic, potential fire and other disasters, greater health risks, and  injury to our unique habitat?  Is that really in the best interest of our residents?

The oil companies are not likely to let the city back out of the lease.  The City council also seems determined to go forward with oil drilling.  The only way to stop the shortsightedness of the city council is through a lawsuit to prevent the October 28, 2008 oil drilling lease from moving forward.   That’s the reason for the lawsuit brought by the Open Space Legal Defense Fund (OSLDF), formed by local citizens volunteering their time to acquire and examine documents, frame the issues, and hire the necessary firms to challenge the EIR and the legality of the oil drilling lease.  If you think our special hills should be preserved for recreation and habitat protection, the purposes for which it was bought, your donation is essential in this fight.

The OSLDF is incorporated as a 501 (c) 3 organization.  Contributions made to OSLDF may be tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.  Consult you tax consultant for advice. 

Los Angeles Superior Court judge says she will allow anti-oil drilling lawsuit to go forward