In a more intimate setting, the City of Signal Hill held its second public meeting on June 24 regarding a proposed 20-year Conditional Use Permit (CUP) extension for Signal Hill Petroleum.
Multiple residents requested a second public hearing at the initial June 4 meeting, where the Signal Hill City Council Chambers were packed to standing room only. Despite these requests, only a fraction of residents attended the second public hearing.
Community Development Director Colleen Doan went over identical information at both public hearings regarding the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) conducted on the project. The EIR concluded its public commenting period on June 24, following a month-long window when residents could send in their written comments or questions about the project.
The five residents who spoke at the June 24 public hearing also spoke at the June 4 meeting, asking questions about how Signal Hill Petroleum affects the groundwater, how accurate the data in the EIR is and how they calculated the effects on tribal cultural resources.
Most of the comments however, were aimed at the City itself, asking why officials didn’t put more effort into promoting the public hearings or educating residents about the project.
“Over the past few months, organizers like myself have been reaching out to Signal Hill residents to inform them about Signal Hill Petroleum’s plans to not only continue toxic oil drilling operations, but add even more wells in these residents’ backyards,” said Andrea Vega, Southern California senior organizer with Food & Water Watch. “The vast majority of residents we spoke with had no idea that a proposed neighborhood drilling expansion project was in the works, with many expressing their concerns about even more drilling in their communities …”
Food & Water Watch is a national organization that advocates for safe food, clean water and a liveable climate, according to its website.
“Repeated requests for the City to extend the EIR’s Public Comment Period due to improper notification have not been addressed,” said QC, member of local group Climate Brunch. “The City needs to do more to responsibly and properly address the mounting calls from concerned residents, community organizers, and members of the scientific community to equitably evaluate the very real concerns that have not been addressed or responded to in this legal process.”
At both meetings, residents criticized the City’s hiring of Catalyst Environmental to conduct the EIR since the firm conducted a similar analysis for the California Independent Petroleum Association in 2017.
“This environmental analysis is one of the worst I’ve seen in 25 years of reviewing such documents,” said Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute. “It blatantly ignores both the law and the harm to those living in these neighborhoods. This dangerous project needs to be stopped for our health and the climate before it’s too late.”
Doan said that all comments made during the two public hearings and written to the City before the deadline will be included as an appendix in the final draft. The final draft may take multiple weeks or months to complete.
The final EIR draft will be sent to the Signal Hill Planning Commission, which will send its recommendation to the City Council. City Councilmembers will hold a final public hearing and make the decision on the permit extension. The City estimates this will take place in September.
View a full copy of the draft EIR by visiting cityofsignalhill.org/612/Current-Projects.
Related Reading:
