TRAA Hammers Council; Mayor and Weideman Cry Foul
For the past several months members of the Torrance Refinery Action Alliance (TRAA) have appeared at Council meetings during oral communications to express ongoing concerns about the danger posed to the community through the use of hydroflouric acid (“HF”) at the ExxonMobil refinery.
The TRAA claims that as part of the consent decree agreed upon between the City of Torrance and ExxonMobil that the refiner agreed to use modified HF in order to reduce the risk use of the dangerous chemical presents to area residents in the so called “killzone.” TRAA claims they recently discovered that in 1998 Torrance allowed ExxonMobil to reduce the percentage of the additive from the agreed upon 30% to 10% or even less.
In stunning allegations, one member of TRAA claimed at the last Council meeting that in 1998 then Fire Chief R.S. Adams penned a document on behalf of the City approving a reduction in the HF additive. Subsequently in 1999, according to the speaker, the fire chief retired and was hired by ExxonMobil. The member then suggested, “you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see that this smacks of something really awful.”
Several other members expressed continued concerns about the lack of progress on a study the City had promised to conduct at a meeting on the issue last October.
One of those speakers expressed shock that nothing had been done and criticized the Council for what he termed a relaxed approach to this issue as he believed the City has already had sufficient time to complete the study. He wondered why the Council was not asking questions and demanding action from the City Manager.
Yet another member suggested the City Attorney vacate the consent decree with ExxonMobil suggesting it was outdated while another member called for an independent investigation into the whole affair as the issue is undermining confidence in the City of Torrance.
In response, Mayor Furey took aim at one of his favorite targets, the Daily Breeze. He stated that “some things published in the newspaper were not paradigms of accuracy,” also noting that was a kind way to say how he really felt.
He encouraged people not to repeat those inaccuracies contained in the local paper and then went on to question the memory process of former elected officials who claim they knew nothing about what was occurring when the additive was presumably reduced because, according to Furey, “that’s not true.”
One of the former elected officials Mayor Furey referred to is current School Board President Don Lee who was quoted extensively in the Daily Breeze article claiming the Council was not informed back in 1998 when the City allowed ExxonMobil to reduce the additive.
Councilman Weideman also took umbrage with the questions proffered by the TRAA. He offered that it was not the nature of oral communications for the Council to engage in a dialogue and that for somebody to say I would like to ask you all a question is out of bounds. At the conclusion of the meeting, he followed up those statements by saying that he found it objectionable when a gentlemen stands up here and says I’d like to ask you a question.
The disclaimer included in every City Council agenda and read aloud prior to oral communications states that, “Council cannot act on items raised during public comment, but may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed; request clarification; or refer the item to staff.”
Widerman went beyond his bounds when he voted down the construction project because he didn’t like the balcony. He needs to review his training material, for the hillside overlay all he needed to look at were light, privacy and views. Interesting that 3 didn’t see any issues but 4 did.
Council is getting too comfortable in their seats lately, they forget they were voted by the people hence answer to concerns from the people. This is not a dictatorship but definitely starting to feel like it.
How can you trust any of them, I’m still looking for the fingerprinting machines Don Lee put in every school.
Furey sees one part of his job as protecting the city bureaucracy. On the whole, I think Mr. Jackson does a pretty good job, but if the allegations are true (and based on the evidence presented I believe them to be true), he should be fired. Furey will fight tooth and nail to prevent this. As for HF, I remember reading about 20 years ago that it was used at the refinery. Having studied chemistry and seen a demo of its corrosive and vapor character, I was shocked that it would be used in bulk within our city. Some people have stated that they “feel safe”…well I have worked for two companies in which industrial accidents have resulted in deaths. Everyone “feels safe” until they are not.
I’m glad the word is getting out about modified hydrofluoric acid (MHF). Thanks, Clint. I am a member of TRAA and have a few clarifications I’d like to make. “TRAA claims…as part of consent decree.” It’s a fact, not a claim. See court records: http://bit.ly/1TaSbBs. “TRAA claims ..that in 1998 Torrance allowed ExxonMobil to reduce…” (Mobil, not yet ExM) This is a fact we unearthed, not a claim. I since acquired the official 1999 report, hidden for 17 years, from the city: http://bit.ly/1Nzic8W. “30% to 10% or even less.” We don’t claim it’s less than 10%. “TRAA…claimed…in 1998 then Fire Chief R.S. Adams penned a document” accepting the reduction. It’s a fact, not a claim, documented in the 1999 report. “In 1999…the fire chief retired and was hired by ExxonMobil.” ACTUALLY Chief R. S. Scott retired in May 1998, immediately after approving the reduction. He started his own consulting firm that August, and was given training and consulting jobs by the Consent Decree Safety Advisor Steve Maher’s firm, Risk Management Professionals. This “advisor” was a close ally of Mobil’s. See: http://bit.ly/1USR4rx. In 2008, Adams worked w/ Maher in a failed attempt to help Big West Refinery build a new MHF unit. RE: questioning at the City Council meeting. The city has refused to put “MHF study” as a monthly agenda item, to provide status updates to residents. If they did so, there would be no need for residents to “ask questions” during public comments. This study should be quick. There are 3 known alternatives to MHF. Give a deadline for the refinery to chose one, and a deadline to implement.
Thank you Sally for providing the additional information and clarifications to the article. I greatly appreciate the effort you are making to uncover the facts about the issue so that the community is informed. Just as an FYI, your comment initially was blocked due to the helpful links you provided imbedded into your comment. That is why it took so long to appear.
Attn Torrance Residents! In reading this summary of the actions mentioned by the Mayor and another Council Member both seem to forget the following: “No matter WHO is elected to sit in OUR CHAIRS OF GOVERNMENT IN THIS CITY, those CHAIRS belong to “WE THE PEOPLE”, the ELECTORATE of this city!! Those who sit in them are their as our representatives and should ACT responsibly to ASSURE the concerns brought to them ARE LISTENED TO, TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT AND ACTED UPON WITH A REPORT TO THE CITIZENS of the community! It doesn’t matter how any council member feels personally all have a DUTY, OBLIGATION, AND A RESPONSIBILITY to the citizens of Torrance to respond to them no matter what!