The California Supreme Court ruled that Monterey County cannot unilaterally ban new oil and gas wells. The decision strikes down a voter-approved measure amid an ongoing battle over fossil fuels and how the state can address concerns over climate and personal health concerns.
In 2016, Monterey County voters approved a ballot initiative entitled “Protect Our Water: Ban Fracking and Limit Risky Oil Operations Initiative,” on the ballot as “Measure Z,” by a 56% majority. Measure Z would have banned new oil and gas drilling in the county, which sits on the coast south of San Francisco. The Measure also prohibited certain oil production techniques, including wastewater injection and fracking.
Chevron and other major oil industry players opposed the measure in court. The fossil fuel companies asserted a litany of legal arguments, including improper taking, due process violations, as well as state and federal preemption. The County agreed to put the measure on hold while the challenge proceeded through the courts. Ultimately, the state Supreme Court found the preemption argument persuasive.
California law establishes a system for the state to oversee oil production within the state. Per the Court, “ statutorily granted authority” to determine whether and when various oil production practices are suitable.
If a practice is permitted by state law but banned by local law, the rules of preemption dictate that the local law is unenforceable. Because Measure Z’s prohibition on new oil wells and certain extraction methods conflicted with state law on the subject, the Court invalidated the county law.
The ruling raises questions over the legality of similar restrictions imposed by other municipalities across the state. Last year, the Los Angeles City Council voted to ban new oil and gas drilling. San Benito County voters approved a ballot measure to prohibit fracking in 2014.
Notably, the state Supreme Court’s decision did not address Monterey’s ban on fracking. Per the Court, fracking was “ not at issue here because none of the plaintiffs use, or have any plans to use, such methods.” The Court also emphasized that its ruling was not intended to “decide, or express any opinion on, whether local entities may restrict or ban oil production within their boundaries based on proper zoning restrictions.” Municipalities may still implement local regulations requiring permits for oil drilling or restricting oil drilling to particular zoning districts.
The Monterey dispute is emblematic of the statewide battle over the future of drilling in California. The state’s Democratic leaders have sought to reduce dependency on fossil fuels and move toward sustainable fuel sources. Governor Newsom has instituted numerous laws and regulations to curb oil drilling. He’s said that California should stop issuing fracking permits by 2024 and has expressed a goal of halting all drilling in the state by 2045.
Last year, Governor Newsom signed into law a ban on drilling within 3,200 feet of homes, parks, schools, and other community locales. Oil industry advocates succeeded in getting a referendum on the 2024 ballot to overturn the law, effectively putting the ban on hold. After the state Supreme Court struck down Monterey’s drilling ban, environmental advocates began a campaign for their own ballot measure to uphold the law. Californians may well end up voting on competing measures in 2024.
