Measure A
Discretionary environmental reviews threaten rule of law and give too much power to officials.
When Ventura County started permitting oil wells in 1948, the oil company would go through an upfront process and then be able to drill more in that well by paying a fee. In 1977, the county added discretionary reviews for new permits via the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). Measures A and B apply the new discretionary review system to wells permitted before 1977, for coastal and non-coastal zones, respectively. For more historical background, I recommend this VC Star article and this Los Padres Forest Watch article.
The supporting campaign, VC-SAFE, claims that Measures A and B would protect our water supply (it stands for Ventura County Save Agriculture and Freshwater For Everybody). However, state and federal regulators already subject oil wells to objective tests to ensure safety. A U.S. Geological Survey study failed to identify petroleum-related gases in Ventura County irrigation wells, and the State Water Board insists that existing programs protect groundwater near oil and gas production sites.
Opponents, meanwhile, cite the economic damage of the measures: “Higher energy prices”, “Loss of thousands of jobs and tens of millions in tax revenue”, and “More imports of costly foreign oil”. Economic theory predicts each of these directionally, as the discretionary reviews would add tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to the cost of new permits (or make them untenable), though the scale of the job loss seems implausible. The campaign spokesman has said that the oil and gas companies employ about 800 people directly, and that another 1,300 work in related sectors. VC-SAFE is wrong to claim that there would be “No Change in Jobs”, “No Change at Pump”, and “No Change in Public Services”, but opponents are also wrong to claim thousands of jobs (they haven’t provided a source for the revenue loss).
If you’ve been exposed to the housing approval process, Measures A and B may sound familiar. Discretionary environmental reviews often obstruct the development of dense housing and non-vehicle infrastructure like bike lanes, even if they would benefit the environment. And indeed, the leader of the VC-SAFE campaign, Merrill Berge, is one of Ventura County’s most prominent anti-density advocates. Berge came on the local politics scene by spending seven years fighting a 2,500-home development in Camarillo, including creating the NIMBY organization Camarillo Sustainable Growth. She is also on the board of Save Open Space & Agricultural Resources (SOAR), an organization promoting the successful 2016 ballot measure to prevent farmers from building homes on their property. Her role in VC-SAFE appears to connect to her board chair position at Climate First: Replacing Oil & Gas (CFROG). It brings me no joy to side with fossil fuel companies, but VC-SAFE leadership has arguably done even more damage to the environment by preventing people from living in low-carbon dense homes in coastal California.
The direct impacts of Measures A and B include lower domestic oil production—which will be partly offset by imports—leading to lower emissions and pollution globally, at the expense of local economic activity, including jobs and tax revenue. In 2021, I might have felt differently, but I currently believe that current geopolitics justify trading off some environmental benefits to weaken Russia by reducing imports, and that includes increasing (or at least not decreasing) domestic oil production. But I hold that view only weakly, and I could be persuaded that we shouldn’t adjust long-term policy for short-term circumstances.
A view I hold more strongly is the importance of rule of law. Measures A and B increase dependence on discretionary processes, which are great for consultants and corrupt politicians, but threaten the rest of our democratic system. Environmentalists should identify opportunities to make the world a safer place with better rules, rather than giving more power to officials to arbitrarily approve or deny their constituents’ activities.
Vote for rule of law; vote no on A and B.