Home News Would a Settlement be Desirable in Community vs. PXP?

Would a Settlement be Desirable in Community vs. PXP?

147
0
SHARE

Reading the meaning of a continuance in a knifingly contentious court case can be as amorphous as interpreting the exact meaning of cloudy morning skies:

Do they portend a wet day? Or the likelihood of protracted sunshine later in the day?

In the on and on and ongoing matter of four separate lawsuits by residents against Plains Exploration & Production Co., for protection when PXP drills for oil in the Inglewood Oil Field, last Friday’s presumed climactic hearing was continued for two months — with a caveat:

At mid-day on Friday, when Judge James Chalfant declared a postponement until June 3, he simultaneously urged the two sides to dedicate themselves to reaching a settlement, neither a novel nor a discouraging directive.

They had been scheduled in court Downtown at 9:30 this morning for a ruling, but now the call is, more sharply than before, in their lap.

One of the attorneys for the petitioners, Ken Kutcher, also a resident of the immediately affected Culver Crest area, said disappointment was his first impulse — he was steeled to fight — but not his second.

A settlement could be advantageous for both sides because a compromise means they would proceed from a certain portion of the presently disputed year and a half old ordinance.

If the residents prevail in June, the ordinance would be wiped out.

That would set the stage for another lengthy battle, community vs. PXP, over health and safety protections as the oil company plans for the next 20 years.