Residents near the Freeport-McMoRan oil drilling site on Jefferson Boulevard near Arlington Avenue are still urging a shutdown because of foul smells and loud noise.
The South L.A. oil well near USC has come under renewed criticism during the past year because of disruptions to lives and other nuisances like traffic congestion and blight that residents claim are undue hazards to their quality of life. Many persons spoke recently at a packed City Hall hearing and said the oil company had been violating dacades-old city rules. They urged officials place a moratorium on additional drilling at the effected site. They also want the city to impose stricter conditions to protect neighbors, including a suggestion that the company enclose their drilling equipment in a structure. Freeport-McMoRan has disputed the nuisance complaints, but did withdraw plans to drill one well and redrill another two.
There are approximately 1,000 active oil wells scattered across the city, and some residents are worried that further drilling (and/or fracking) could result in a disaster like the Porter Ranch gas leak in more than 2,000 households have had to evacuate. However, because the oil well is situated within a densely populated area, environmental and neighborhood activists are pressing city officials about just how much influence they have over oil exploration.
Various youth and environmental groups have sued the city, arguing that the Planning Department had been improperly “rubber stamping” drilling applications and had required fewer protections for neighbors around drilling sites in primarily Black and Latino neighborhoods than they require in predominantly White areas. Community Health Councils, a nonprofit watchdog group, maintains that because the Jefferson Boulevard site is adjacent to two apartment buildings, it should be shut down for health and environmental reasons.
Sabrina Lockhart, a spokeswoman for the California Independent Petroleum Association, said that calls to reexamine city rules for the urban site were merely “veiled attempts” to halt operations that will ultimately hurt the community through “job loss” and reduced “revenue and royalty benefits.”
On the opposite side of the argument, Angela Johnson-Meszaros, an attorney with the law firm EarthJustice, said the city has more leverage against the petroleum industry than it has utilizes. She said the city can both approve and deny a permit for a drilling site “at its sees fit.” Johnson-Meszaros and other community activists point to the Los Angeles Municipal Code which states that the city can change or revoke approvals by the Planning Department for any number of reasons. She said this includes if the resulting activity jeopardizes the health or safety of homeowners, residents or other stakeholders by creating a public nuisance or contributes to a violation of local, state and federal law.
Los Angeles once had oil sites practically everywhere, but the increased pollution forced a halt in the 1930s to so-called “wildcatting” or excessive oil exploration in urban areas. There are now site-by-site rules to protect residents and also to regularly monitor whether oil companies are abiding by city conditions.
The Jefferson Boulevard site was approved in 1965. At the time, the city insisted that the company operating it should retain neighboring buildings as a “buffer” of sorts to, in effect, shield the heavy equipment from public view. That rule was changed in 1999, allowing then-empty buildings to be sold and used as housing. When they were sold, wording within the original deed remained intact, stating that oil operations next door “… could cause noxious fumes, loud noise and safety hazards.”
