The Council also voted by the same vote margin (with Garcetti again absent) to approve a fifty year lease with BNSF to construct, operate and maintain the proposed facility on Port of L.A. owned land, about four miles from the docks, the border of West Long Beach.

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

Multiple entities appealed the L.A. Harbor Commission's certification of the project's EIR -- the Coalition for Clean Air, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, and Natural Resources Defense Council; Fast Lane Transportation, Incorporated; Coalition For A Safe Environment; City of Long Beach, Long Beach Unified School District; South Coast Air Quality Management District; and California Cartage Company, Three Rivers Trucking Incorporated, Los Angeles Harbor Grain Terminal, and San Pedro Forklift.

The hearing opened with a presentation by Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Geraldine Knatz, Ph.D., who displayed a slide contending that levels of two main pollutants will be lower if the SCIG is built (blue line) but would remain high (red line) if the Council failed to approve the SCIG.

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

The Port's contention that SCIG would produce cleaner air collided with subsequent testimony by South Coast Air Quality Management District Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein, Ph.D...who said SCAQMD staff has concluded that the result will worsen air quality (further below).

Regarding on-dock rail, Dr. Knatz said a May 6 Long Beach Harbor Commission agenda item which discussed the possibility of putting a railyard on Pier S [which PoLB staff said wasn't feasible] failed to note that the Port of LB had given up rights to put proprietary railyards in the Ports when the Alameda Corridor was constructed. No company would build a railyard in the Port that competitors would use, Dr. Knatz said. She said there's a need for a central collecting location -- outside the Ports -- so containers can be sorted and taken to specific areas...and said landfill to create in-port railyard would cost about $1 billion and have insufficient mitigation credits.

Dr. Knatz called BNSF a strategic partner with the Port, noting goods movement projects advancing in mid-America (Chicago) and with an improved Panama Canal. She said projects like the SCIG can "make us or break us"...and said SCIG would protect the Port of L.A.'s competitiveness.

Appellant testimony opened with Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster. The Long Beach City Council appealed the EIR citing multiple technical grounds, it didn't take a publicly voted position on whether to support or oppose the SCIG project itself. Mayor Foster's testimony cited negative impacts of the project and called the result "not a good tradeoff for the City of Long Beach." He acknowledged elements to the project that can't be mitigated and said in those instances, despite state law, the project doesn't include funding "even the bare minimum to help pay for air filters and new windows in neighborhood houses. Nothing."

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

At roughly 3:13 seconds into his testimony, L.A. Council President Herb Wesson asked Mayor Foster to "wrap it up." Mayor Foster said L.A. and Long Beach work cooperatively together and "this project can be made better, but the [L.A.] Harbor Department has not done that." Mayor Foster indicated that he'd met or spoken on the phone with L.A. Harbor Commission President Cindy Miscikowski in September or October and has had several meetings with BNSF "for over a year. There has been no progress." [Time called at 3:43]

To hear Mayor Foster's testimony, click here

Mayor Foster was followed by David Pettit, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council (representing Coalition for Clean Air, East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice and NRDC).

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

Mr. Pettit responded to a number of Port of L.A. contentions. Regarding on-dock rail, Mr. Pettit said the Port of L.A. is currently planning or building millions of dollars in on-dock rail facilities and "if those were truly worthless and they couldn't form up trains...they wouldn't be doing that...On-dock is a real possibility here, and I think if the Mayor made one telephone call then the engineering problems would be solved..."

Regarding the Port of L.A.'s contention that SCIG would improve air quality, Mr. Pettit said "that is a misstatement" and said that for his clients, "overall this is a civil rights issue. The EIR frankly admits that there will be a much worse impact of this project on the neighboring low income communities of color than anywhere else. If this goes to litigation, we're going to file a Title 6 complaint with the [U.S.] Dept. of Transportation, a Civil Rights claim in the state court..."

[U.S. Dept. of Transportation website text re Title VI complaints: "Under an Executive Order on Environmental Justice and the U.S. Department of Transportation's Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, a member of the public, a group of people, or their representatives can file an administrative complaint against a recipient of financial assistance from FTA, a transportation provider, a transportation-related entity, or FTA itself alleging discrimination and/or adverse environmental effects, including social and economic effects, against a specific minority or low income community or population group, due to a project or activity funded or carried out by DOT."]

To hear the testimony of Mr. Pettit, click here

NRDC's Pettit was followed by SCAQMD Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein...who said the Port of L.A.'s claims about reduced pollutants are incorrect...and said that in the AQMD's entire history, it had never appeared before any body to oppose a project...until now. "We took this step because the pollution from the SCIG will harm public health and because the project does not include feasible mitigation measures as required under CEQA."

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

Dr. Wallerstein displayed an air filter from an AQMD air monitor -- after one day -- at Hudson school in West Long Beach.

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

"This filter shows the type of air pollution that exists in the community today. It's a January sample of particulate pollution. It came from an AQMD monitor at Hudson Elementary School (2335 Webster Ave.) near the SCIG site. The filter paper goes in pure white and it came out this way just after one day, and the dark color indicates highly toxic emissions."

Dr. Wallerstein said the SCIG project found that the project will significantly increase particulate emissions and that nitrogen oxides emitted from the project will more than double compared to without the SCIG. Noting that the Port of L.A. contends that pollution levels in the adjacent community will be lower, Dr. Wallerstein said, "Our [AQMD] review with our air quality experts indicates that that is not so, that the EIR overstates future pollution levels without SCIG, making the project appear more beneficial, so we strongly disagree with the chart that has been presented to you."

Dr. Wallerstein asked the Council to send the EIR back to the Port and said AQMD is "committed to work with the Port to resolve these issues and bring you back an acceptable project."

To hear Dr. Wallerstein's testimony, click here..

Also testifying as an appellant was LBUSD, represented by Carrie Matsumoto, who asked the L.A. City Council to de-certify the EIR that the L.A. Harbor Commission had approved. To hear her testimony, click here.

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

After all the appellants representatives had spoken (given three minutes each), individual members of the public spoke (given one minute each)...with 25 minutes of collective speakers allowed in opposition, followed by 25 minutes of collective speakers in support. Long Beach Councilman James Johnson (apparently thinking he had two minutes) got off to a flying start with soaring rhetoric but found himself cut off at sixty seconds by L.A. Council President Herb Wesson who strictly enforced the one minute limit. During his remarks, Councilman Johnson said, "We need real, enforceable progress toward zero emissions, help for the displaced businesses and a buffer park and real community mitigation for impacted residents..." To hear Councilman Johnson's testimony, click here.

Among those testifying in support of the project was Randy Gordon, President/CEO of the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce. To hear Mr. Gordon's testimony, click here..

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com

Others testifying in support were Carson Mayor Jim Dear; Maria Elena Durazo Secy-Treas of LA County Fed'n of Labor; LA Chamber of Commerce Pres/CEO Gary Toebben; Michele Grubbs of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, and a representative of the LA/OC Building and Trades Council.

An overflow room was opened to accommodate the large hearing turnout. LBREPORT.com carried LIVE video of the hearing in its entirety from the City of L.A.'s website.

L.A. Councilman Tom LaBonge made a motion to approve certification of the EIR, and approve a 50 century lease to BNSF. to build and operate the SCIG facility. Harbor area Councilman Joe Buscaino seconded. Multiple Councilmembers cited what they said was a need for the Port of L.A. to remain competitive for supporting the railyard. Councilman Bill Rosendahl said the issue for him was a "no brainer," citing the need to remain competitive with changes being made to the "Suez Canal" [presumably meant Panama Canal].

Councilman Paul Koretz asked several probing questions but ultimately voted with the Council majority to support the proposal. L.A. Councilmembers Jan Perry and Bernard Parks were the sole votes in dissent.

Councilman Eric Garcetti -- one of the two candidates in the run-off election to become L.A.'s new Mayor for the next four years [during which he would likely have to deal with the SCIG issue and interact with Long Beach] was absent for the entire hearing. LBREPORT.com's telephone call and email at late afternoon to his campaign's press aide, seeking information about his absence and whereabouts, received no response by 3:00 a.m. May 9. [LBREPORT.com will add Councilman Garcetti's response when received.]

Screen save from City of LA video stream, carried on LBREPORT.com