The California Supreme Court has tanked Monterey County's prohibition of oil and gas drilling, ruling the county's ban flies in the face of superseding state law that gives oversight of drilling to Sacramento.
The Aug. 3 decision was written by Associate Justice Martin Jenkins, with concurrence from Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and Associate Justices Goodwin Liu, Joshua Groban, Leondra Kruger and Kelli Evans. Michael Raphael, an associate justice for the California Fourth Appellate District, also deliberated on the matter and concurred. The decision favored a number of oil companies, mineral rights holders and others in their dispute with the environmentalist activist group Protect Monterey County (PMC).
In 2016, PMC sponsored Measure Z, which was approved by 56 percent of voters, that led to an ordinance that banned oil and natural gas drilling in the county's unincorporated areas.
Legal action to neutralize the ordinance was taken in Monterey County Superior Court by Chevron; San Ardo Union Elementary School District; Aera Energy; Eagle Petroleum; Trio Petroleum; Sunset Exploration; Bradley Minerals; Monroe Swell Prospect; National Association of Royalty Owners; California Resources Corporation; and various individuals.
Superior Court Judge Thomas Wills determined the ordinance conflicted with superior state law and was a "pretextual attempt to do indirectly what [the County] cannot do directly,” which was to bring oil production in the county “to a complete halt in five years or less.”
PMC went to California Sixth District Appellate Court, without the county participating, but failed to reverse the decision. PMC then sought out the State Supreme Court, but again, without success.
Justice Jenkins found the ordinance usurps the power of the State Oil and Gas Supervisor, who works through the California Department of Conservation to oversee oil and gas production.
"Measure Z nullifies — and therefore contradicts" — the law that the state “'shall'” supervise oil operation in a way that permits well operators to “'utilize all methods and practices,'" Justice Jenkins noted.
Jenkins further noted, "Were any oil producer to ask the state to decide whether those methods are authorized for use in the County, Measure Z, by banning those methods, has made that decision for — and in lieu of — the supervisor."
According to Jenkins, quoting a Fourth Appellate District decision, for the ordinance and state law to coexist, compliance with both must be "'reasonably possible,'" but "we cannot say it is 'reasonably possible' for well operators 'to comply with both the state and local laws' by requiring them to curb their conduct in a way that conforms to a local ban, without regard to what the state law permits."
Jenkins pointed out that if this were not so, a local law would never be preempted by a contradictory state law, because a party could comply with both laws by not engaging in an act that would violate the local law, rendering the state law superfluous.
PMC was represented by Robins Kaplan, of Minneapolis; Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger, of San Francisco; Environmental Law Clinic, of Stanford Law School; and in-house lawyers from Center for Biological Diversity, of Tucson.
The oil and mineral interests were represented by: Alston & Bird, of Atlanta; Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, of Los Angeles; Ragghianti Freitas, of San Rafael; Hanson Bridgett, of San Francisco; Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, of Los Angeles; and Clifford & Brown, of Bakersfield.
Also representing plaintiffs were: Hanna & Morton, of Los Angeles; JRG Attorneys at Law, of Monterey; and O'Melveny & Myers, of Los Angeles.
Friend-of-the-court arguments were submitted in support of PMC by: Communities for a Better Environment; Natural Resources Defense Council; San Francisco Baykeeper; Center on Race, Poverty and Environment; and Santa Clara County.
Other arguments for PMC were presented by: League of California Cities; California State Association of Counties; Los Angeles County; and former Democratic State Sen. Fran Pavley.
Arguments for the energy companies and mineral right owners were submitted by: Western States Petroleum Association; California Independent Petroleum Association; U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Central Valley Business Federation; California Chamber of Commerce; and Los Angeles County Business Federation.