Richmond City Council bans storing coal

The Richmond City Council approved an ordinance that bans the storage, handling of coal, petroleum coke.

RICHMOND >> The Richmond City Council on Tuesday approved an ordinance that bans the storage and handling of coal and petroleum coke in the city, which some residents have complained is harmful to their health.

The ordinance also phases out existing coal and coke operations within three years.

The move comes about a month after Richmond Mayor Tom Butt postponed the vote so discussions could continue with executives of the LevinRichmond Terminal, who had threatened to sue the city if it approved the ordinance. The terminal is the only facility in the city that handles coal.

As in December, the council chambers was packed Tuesday night with environmental activists and concerned residents who supported the coal ban and port workers who opposed it.

But where last time the meeting included more than six hours of public comment from both sides of the issue, Butt did not allow any public speakers this round, noting it was time for the council to decide.

With Councilmember Demnlus Johnson absent and Councilmember Nathaniel Bates having walked away for a break just before the vote, the council approved the ordinance with no discussion.

Levin-Richmond Terminal Corp. president Gary Levin warned the council in a July letter that adopting the ban could lead to closure of the terminal and the loss of 62 jobs.

Wolverine Fuels, a company that exports thermal coal to Japan using the Levin-Richmond Terminal, also threatened to sue in a letter sent to the council.

Coal and petroleum coke shipments make up more than 80 percent of the Levin-Richmond Terminal’s business, according to executives at the company. The coal is mostly shipped to Japan and petroleum coke to other countries for use in manufacturing.

“We were disappointed with the vote and continue to urge that the City Council reject the proposal and instead adopt the Planning Commission’s unanimous recommendation to ‘get the facts’ before they vote on the ordinance,” Levin-Richmond Terminal Corp. vice president Barbara O’Neill said Wednesday, referring to the Planning Commission recommendation to defer a decision until more air quality studies are done by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the California Air Resources

Board and a local steering committee.

The ordinance still must be formally adopted at a future meeting before it can take effect.

“We are hopeful the City Council will reconsider,” O’Neill continued. “If not, we will be forced to pursue litigation to protect the interests of our employees and our company.”

But residents living near the terminal who have complained about coal dust collecting on their homes and streets fear the cost to their health is too steep.

Christiana Tiedemann, retired counsel for the California Environmental Protection Agency, pointed out in a December letter to the council that the ordinance allows “a phase out of the existing coal land use, with ample time to convert to a cleaner use.”

“The proposed amendments also provide a detailed administrative procedure to ensure that they will not result in an unconstitutional taking of any private property,” she said, noting the legal threats by the terminal are unlikely to hold up.

“Threats of litigation against the City if the amendments are adopted should not deter the Council from doing the right thing to protect residents’ health and safety,” she wrote.

In approving the ban, Richmond followed in the footsteps of the Oakland City Council, which adopted a similar ordinance in 2016 and was sued for doing so by developer Phil Tagami, who had planned to build a bulk shipping terminal at the former Oakland Army base.

A federal judge subsequently ruled that the city’s ban violated its agreement with Tagami, a decisions that the city has appealed.