Mayor Andy Weissman and City Councilperson Meghan Sahli-Wells, the Odd Couple, may take a deep bow in tandem this morning for attaining elusive accord on the most fractious political issue of the season, suddenly sizzling fracking.
With hyper-anti-fracking partisans howling at the gates – 24 persons spoke at last night’s Council meeting, the last 23 lengthily copying what the first said, ban fracking here and elsewhere – Mr. Weissman’s inherent sense of fair play and Ms. Sahli-Wells’s double-barreled fierce persistence and courageous will to compromise won the day. The public may never know how heroic her actions were to effect a peaceful settlement with opposing parties – dug-in hardliners determined to accept nothing but an immediate ban, in Culver City and across California, vs. those favoring the softer moratorium approach.
The two-tiered Council meeting delivered the anticipated extreme emotion, apocalyptic language and accompanying drama in both segments, one upgraded from the original intention, the other a disappointment to the rowdy, marginally undisciplined crowd.
Winners and Losers
Partisans got their way in the first round – a substitute resolution to be forwarded to Gov. Brown, asking him to ban fracking statewide – despite having only two votes, Vice Mayor Jeff Cooper and Ms. Sahli-Wells.
This is where Mr. Weissman, with the co-operation of Ms. Sahli-Wells, stepped in to alter the whole tone of the evening.
The original language, which had been edited by Mr. Weissman, called for a statewide moratorium, not a ban, a view that won majority support, including Jim Clarke and Mehaul O’Leary. Arguing for the ultimately losing majority, Mr. Clarke said that, in reality, “moratorium” was the effective equal of ban. Mr. O’Leary said a moratorium is “a ban with a time limit.” He said he did not want to put pressure on the state.
“Words are important,” Ms. Sahli-Wells countered. “The state needs to be pressured. We don’t have time to mess around and not be bold. Obviously, we need more information (about the alleged perils of hydraulic fracturing) than we have now. Our message really does matter.”
In an era of sustainability, sustained, almost unrelieved, applause followed her call to arms. Dozens of times, the sometimes bumptious crowd baldly ignored Mr. Weissman’s plea to not rupture the decorum by applauding. (A woolly looking man in the third row, identifying himself as a member of Occupy L.A., numerous times called out criticism to the dais but survived the evening.)
Before officially polling his colleagues, the mayor had identified himself as a centrist. Alone in his position, he said he could embrace either “moratorium” or “ban” in the resolution locution.
All Needed on One Side
Even though his side prevailed, sending a resolution to Sacramento on the wings of a wobbly 3 to 2 vote did not feel right to the mayor. “The message we send to Sacramento needs to be unanimous,” he said firmly. “I don’t think we should get hung up on a word.”
At that point, Ms. Sahli-Wells re-introduced her amendment to the original resolution, subbing “ban” for “moratorium.”
It read:
“The City of Culver City urges Gov. Jerry Brown and the California State Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), to immediately place a moratorium ban on hydraulic fracturing and on the disposal of fracking wastewater by injection wells until DOGGR takes all necessary and appropriate actions to adopt, implement and enforce comprehensive regulations concerning the practice of fracking that will ensure that public health and safety and the environment will be adequately protected.”
Promptly, everyone on the dais mounted the, by now, runaway train that was the resolution, turning a 3 to 2 loss into a 5 to 0 victory for the Strike Up the Ban crowd.
Hyper-partisans had envisioned Round Two of the evening as the ban event – pursuit of a local ban on fracking.
It was not.
That train never left the station.
Rising to Stardom
Here was where Ms. Sahli-Wells became heroic again, although some in Ban the Bomb audience may have gone home regarding her as conservatives last week cast John Roberts.
Although she would have philosophically sympathized with all two dozen speakers, she became the take-charge adult.
She may have stunned the Council Chambers with an extraordinary 816-word prepared statement that soothed the winds and calmed some, definitely not all, hysterical opponents.
(Her entire text is carried nearby.)
We don’t have enough information about the health-and-safety threat many of us believe fracking poses, Ms. Sahli-Wells said.
Her clinching declaration came at the end:
“I ask that staff compile information about the concerns we've heard tonight, information from other states and cities and regulatory bodies and real data from PXP itself to see how we can make our city safe.”
Many in Chambers wanted an instant ban written, but that was not destined.
As Mr. Weissman had changed the environment earlier, Ms. Sahli-Wells did this time. When she, the leader of her side, said the Council’s primary obligation was to collect data before acting, her colleagues lined up behind her in a whoosh sound.
That seemed an ideal, Weissman-style coda for an evening that strained to shatter,.
However, deftly and adroitly, he and Ms. Sahli-Wells tied disparate events into a handsome, accomplished package with the red bow of compromise smiling from the top of it.
